W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > November 2014

Re: w3process-ISSUE-148 (Consider Liaisons): Consider Liaison when deciding who should review a REC Track document [Process Document]

From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 09:41:57 +0100
Cc: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <6ABB9411-B90D-4281-9BD4-1143080FC4CD@mac.com>
To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>

> On Nov 19, 2014, at 5:39 , Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Comment inline:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Singer [mailto:singer@mac.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:32 PM
>> To: Revising W3C Process Community Group
>> Subject: Re: w3process-ISSUE-148 (Consider Liaisons): Consider Liaison when
>> deciding who should review a REC Track document [Process Document]
>> 
>> W3C liaison handling is, at best, very weak.  I have seen formal, careful, liaisons,
>> from other groups, replied to with quite casual emails. If we want to use liaisons
>> and the power they offer, we need to get better at writing and responding to
>> them, alas.
> [SZ] Exactly why Liaisons should be called out in the Wide Review section.

well, my point is that *if* we are to use liaisons, we need to get better at receiving, sending, and responding.

It would really help if there were a staff member whose job it was to receive liaisons, and make sure that they get routed appropriately, and responded to formally in a timely fashion.

One example of the problems that come up is that W3C doesn’t assign identifiers of any kind to liaison letters, so it’s hard to say from the outside “we’re responding to your liaison XXXXX”.

Just getting a little more business-like and methodical would go a long way to making liaisons work better.  Take as an example the recent requests sent from the TTWG for review; they were emails from the chair to people at other organizations. Most other bodies would have made those liaison letters, and there would be a trace (other than mail archives).


Dave Singer

singer@mac.com
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2014 08:42:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:13 UTC