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

Re: Organisational Reminder

From: Andrew Thackrah <andrew@opengroup.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:56:20 +0100
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020808105620.A4500@hyperion>

On 2002.08.08 07:59 Dimitris Dimitriadis wrote:
> 
> 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?

  Agreed,
  I'm already getting 'spammed' with three copies of each mail now and this
  is getting a wee bit annoying - hitting Reply and cc'ing to www-qa-wg 
results
  in the reply-to recipient  getting 2 copies - and now an extra copy from 
www-qa.

I'm all for keeping the discussion off www-qa-wg
  ...I definitely agree that we should restrict www-qa-wg to logistics and 
private chat.
  If we want to discuss open QA issues let's just post them to www-qa
  And perhaps create www-qa-ig to give the IG its own forum to discuss IG 
specifics

  -Andrew
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 05:57:06 GMT

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