W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2015

Re: wai-liaison list [Was: Suggestions for opening up PF]

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 08:42:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VkcMrhGjSOn+ExBaNk2hwNvBtZnteY2Zv=0B9rbc4_8Yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <public-pfwg@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com>, Chaals from Yandex <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Alice Boxhall <aboxhall@google.com>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Mike Paciello <mpaciello@paciellogroup.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Thanks Janina, both 1 and 2 sound good to me.

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 9 April 2015 at 23:50, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

>
> > On Apr 9, 2015, at 10:54 , Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> >
> > Janina Sajka writes:
> >> Hi Again, Steve:
> >>
> >> Steven Faulkner writes:
> >>> Hi Janina, as regards the use if WAI liaison list. it is certainly
> within the power of the PF to stop using the list for spec review comments.
> So an unclear as to your repeated assertions of it being out of PF control.
> >>>
> >> Please note that on https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/ it says
> >> "Records of what we have said to other groups are to be found in the
> >> wai-liaison@w3.org <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/wai-liaison/>
> >> list".
> >>
> >>
> >> BTW, this practice predates my decade plus participation in PF.
> >>
> >> Your observation that responses to our comments end up in wai-liaison,
> >> because people use "reply to all" when they respond, makes it seem it's
> >> a discussion list is indeed accurate, and not the best archiving
> >> practice. We will revisit how to maintain a cleaner archive of our
> >> formal comments and dispositive responses.
> >>
> >> However, please note wai-liaison is NOT PF's spec review discussion
> >> list. We only cc to that list when we've rechaed agreement on a comment
> >> that we're forwarding to another W3C group.
> >>
> >
> > Digging a bit further I have discovered that wai-liaison was originally
> > created primarily for PF to archive its communications to other W3C
> > groups.
> >
> > I'm currently thinking we have two requirements to satisfy with respect
> > to spec reviews when we reorganize PF's lists under the expected new WG
> > name, APA:
> >
> > 1.)   An open list for discussion where anyone can participate.
> >
> > 2.)   A publically readable list, but not publically writable, to
> > archive dispositive emails.
> >
> > The purpose of #1 is obvious, I think.
> >
> > The purpose of #2 is to make it easier to find a record of what was
> > formally decided in past discussions. This was the original purpose of
> > wai-liaison.
> >
>
>
> Thanks
>
> for external liaisons, we also have team-liaisons and
> member-archive-liaisons@w3.org.  Maybe we simply need a general ‘within
> w3c’ liaisons (non-discussion) list.
>
>
> David Singer
> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>
Received on Friday, 10 April 2015 07:43:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 April 2015 07:43:15 UTC