- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 09:51:52 +0000
- To: Jungkee Song <jungkee.song@samsung.com>
- Cc: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, public-sysapps@w3.org, ming79.jin@samsung.com, Janusz Majnert <jmajnert@gmail.com>
Hi Jungkee, On Thursday, 21 February 2013 at 07:13, Jungkee Song wrote: > Hi Mounir, > > I don't think it's fair. I definitely agree to the process you suggested where anyone who makes good contribution should be either acknowledged or added as a co-Editor on the way even after FPWD. However, it's a different story. Samsung and Mozilla had to make a single proposal after all and we decided to step back to make things happen. That being considered, I don't think it makes sense to go FPWD with a single editor. What would you have done if Samsung's proposal had been determined to be the base document? We request at least one editor from Samsung should be added from the beginning having the same role and responsibility. My reading of Mounir's mail was that he was more or less proposing the above. As Mounir said, "It's just as easy to add editors after FPWD as it is before". However, as a sign of good faith and to show the collaborative spirit of this undertaking, it would be good if someone from Samsung was also added as editor (or any other potential implementer that is willing to contribute significantly to the specification). It sends a good message to the community. Having said that, I'm sure everyone agrees with Mounir's position that an Editor is actively responsible for contributing to, and maintaining the quality of, the document throughout the standardization process. Whomever is added to the document before FPWD should be able to show their contribution by actively editing the document (through the proposed process) prior to FPWD. Would that work? Kind regards, Marcos
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2013 09:52:22 UTC