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

Re: small logistics reminder - meeting minutes -

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 17:53:33 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020710173948.01dbc540@rockynet.com>
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Hello Terje,

You got our attention -- message received!  Really, thanks for your input 
and feedback.  We have discussed the problems at today's telecon, DRAFT 
minutes at [1].  We will be doing several things to improve communication 
and visibility of our work.

By the way, a question about minutes format/quality:  the style that you 
see, for example

### begin sample ###
LH first of all we completely agree that a lack of activity
... on IG list is not good.
... We should keep the IG list more informed.
... the QA WG needs also a Core of regular people working on things to 
close the issues.
... It will be difficult to separate the two things?
... A little bit reluctant to move everything to the IG list.
### end ###

is a result of doing the minutes on IRC and capturing the log.  Several of 
our minutes (even final) have this format.  Is that a problem, i.e., too 
distracting or hard to understand?  For those QAWG members who like to do 
minutes this way, it is a real benefit for real-time visibility to QAWG 
members and any others who tune in to the IRC channel.

Regards,
-Lofton.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2002Jul/0029.html



At 09:15 PM 7/9/02 +0200, Terje Bless wrote:

>Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com> wrote:
>
> >Yes, it is.  Jack (6/27) is on vacation.  Karl, Peter are remiss (or
> >late).  Dimitris (7/3) has until COB today ("one week") to post FINAL
> >and point it out to IG list.
> >
> >Should we automatically post an AI, "A-2002-MM-DD-0" at each telecon,
> >with a one-week deadline, "Integrate comments and corrections, mail
> >final to WG list, send message to IG list."?
>
>Jumping in totally out of the blue, and I may well be talking out of my
>backside here, but I've been trying to "observe" the QA-WG doings -- just
>to see what's happening and catch any issues directly relevant to my
>ineterests -- and have found it very difficult to do. Meeting/Telecon
>minutes are consistently late and of widely varying quality, and quite
>frequently do not seem to relate directly to anything discussed on any
>list.
>
>That's not necessarily to say that this state of affairs is wrong. But
>that's /my/ 2 cents; I would personally love to see better communication
>from the QA-WG.
>
>
>/me fades back into the background... :-)
>
>--
>I'm [less] than thrilled by the [VM situation]; all sides of it. I [think]
>we need a [fork] in that area so that you guys would stop stepping on each
>others' toes.  I'm taking no part in your merry 5-way clusterfuck  -- sort
>that mess out between yourselves.                -- Alexander Viro on lkml
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 19:51:03 GMT

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