W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Organisational Reminder

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:59:28 +0300
Cc: "Kirill Gavrylyuk" <kirillg@microsoft.com>, www-qa-wg@w3.org
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@terminal.rockynet.com>
Message-Id: <61C3B240-AA9C-11D6-82E7-000393556882@ontologicon.com>

My two cents: I believe the original intent of the www-qa-wg/www-qa 
setup was to mimic most WG IG/WG division; keeping some things WG only, 
and communicating resolutions, calls for feedback and the like to the IG 
(www-qa) list. On the other hand, WG lists are primarily used for agenda 
items, minutes before published and the like, so Karl has a point.

I suppose what we could do is to keep topics on the www-qa-wg list as 
close to logistics as possible, and have all general discussion on the 
www-qa list (remembering that this entails an audience that may not be 
entirely suited for all such topics.

What about using a third list and keep www-qa entirely public and 
www-qa-wg "closed"? Something like www-qa-ig which would be along the 
lines that Karl suggests?

/Dimitris

On Thursday, August 8, 2002, at 12:22  AM, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>
> At 01:24 PM 8/7/02 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> Why not keep www-qa-wg on the to line as well as www-qa?
>
> This has the side effect that all QAWG members get two copies.  I guess 
> that's better than the broken threads.
>
> -Lofton.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 1:06 PM
>> To: Karl Dubost; www-qa-wg@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Organisational Reminder
>>
>>
>> There is a problem about switching a thread from one list to another,
>> that
>> I dislike a lot.  If something starts on www-qa-wg, and it is switched
>> to
>> www-qa, then the thread is broken on the original archive.  It simply
>> stops, as if the thread died.
>>
>> Even if you know that it continues on the other archive, you can't use
>> the
>> "next in thread" button.  It is pretty inconvenient.
>>
>> Comments or suggestions?
>>
>> -Lofton.
>>
>> At 09:18 AM 8/7/2002 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I would like to remind few principles.
>> >
>> >- Every issues raised on www-qa-wg MUST be discussed on www-qa
>> >- Do not hit Reply and Send.
>> >- How to do:
>> >         1. Reply on www-qa@w3.org
>> >         2. Gives the references to the message
>> >         by using msg-id (not recommended, only if you are offline and
>> > can't do another way.)
>> >
>> >http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/5.1.0.14.2.20020805150918.03f30c60@rockyn
>> et.com
>> >         or web archive reference (preferred)
>> >
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2002Aug/0027.html
>> >         3. start your discussion.
>> >- If the topic is slighty different from the subject, modify it.
>> >
>> >Thank you.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
>> >           http://www.w3.org/QA/
>> >
>> >      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
>> >
>
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 02:59:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:10 GMT