W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Why I don't attend the weekly teleconference (Was: Input on the agenda)

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 01:57:49 +0200
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <520CA73A-7416-479B-9C57-BEE2CBEBCDAF@berjon.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Jun 24, 2009, at 01:39 , Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>> When issues come up in the teleconferences, they're usually put on
>> hold because you're not there to provide either opinion or answer.
>
> If there are unanswered questions at every telecon, then having a  
> short list of questions as part of the telecon output would be very  
> helpful. So maybe that would be a good first step that doesn't  
> require anyone to change the communication style.

Perhaps more to the point: this WG is not chartered on the usual  
template that relies on telcons that Shelley may be expecting. If you  
look at the charter it is clear that communication and decisions are  
expressly marked as being made on the mailing list, which is a  
departure from the majority of other groups. That difference is not  
accidental, it was requested by several participants.

There are cases in which I believe we could get consensus that  
synchronous communication is useful. In such cases, when demonstrated  
and planned for, I'm pretty sure that we could get most stake-holders  
to show up. If there are issues that require synchronous discussion,  
and require some specific participants, then by all means raise them  
as such. But the general case is, as per charter, that telcons are  
optional.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
     Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 23:58:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:04 UTC