W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Managing Public Comments to the RDF WG

From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:13:10 -0400
Cc: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org WG" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, public-rdf-comments Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <62312994-252E-479F-8F42-7A5D50FDDAB3@3roundstones.com>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
> CONCRETE PROPOSAL: (a) Change the subscription and posting policy of the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to allow people who are not working group members to subscribe to that list and post to that list.  (b) When a comment or proposal is sent to public-rdf-comments@w3.org, encourage followup discussion to take place on the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list.

Thank you for your concrete proposal, David.  The RDF WG chairs will not unreasonably withhold comments from the public-ref-comments mailing list if continued discussion is necessary.  However, we will disallow permathreads from developing on this forum.

Regards,
Dave
--
http://about.me/david_wood



On Jun 19, 2013, at 14:03, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:

> I appreciate the difficulty that is caused by having so many messages sent to public-rdf-wg@w3.org , but the practical implications of the policy below seem problematic.
> 
> When a comment or proposal is sent to the public-rdf-comments@w3.org list, frequently there are important followup questions and explanations.  If those are posted to "semantic-web@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org, other mailing lists", how would the commenter be assured that the working group would see them?
> 
> I think the root of the problem is the fact that the regular RDF working group mailing list is only open to members of that group.  Other than the public-rdf-comments@w3.org list, there *is* no other public communication channel available for people who are not WG members to communicate with the RDF working group.  That is a problem.  I believe it was an unintended consequence of the decision to limit the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to working group members (to avoid spam?).
> 
> CONCRETE PROPOSAL: (a) Change the subscription and posting policy of the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to allow people who are not working group members to subscribe to that list and post to that list.  (b) When a comment or proposal is sent to public-rdf-comments@w3.org, encourage followup discussion to take place on the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list.
> 
> Thanks,
> David Booth
> 
> On 06/19/2013 11:43 AM, David Wood wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The purpose of the public-rdf-comments mailing list is to ensure that
>> members of the public may suggest changes to or raise concerns about
>> specifications managed by the RDF Working Group.  Importantly, the
>> RDF WG has a requirement to ensure that each public comment is
>> formally addressed.  That is very hard for us to accomplish when
>> detailed and long-running design discussions take place on that
>> list.
>> 
>> We discussed the management of the public-rdf-comments list during
>> today's telecon and decided that long-running conversations should
>> not take place on that list.  Members of the public wishing to hold
>> such discussions are encouraged to do so on semantic-web@w3.org,
>> public-lod@w3.org, other mailing lists or via interpersonal
>> communications.
>> 
>> Members of the public should therefore limit traffic on
>> public-rdf-comments to concrete proposals to change RDF WG
>> specifications.  The public-rdf-comments mailing list should not be
>> copied on messages to other mailing lists.
>> 
>> Members of the RDF WG should refrain from replying to
>> public-rdf-comments without permission of the WG chairs.
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> Regards, Dave -- http://about.me/david_wood
>> 
>> 
>> 



Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 18:13:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:57 UTC