W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Architecture or process?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 11 Sep 2002 08:16:32 -0500
To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1031750193.2991.3246.camel@dirk>

On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 06:36, Graham Klyne wrote:
> Is it *really* appropriate for TAG to discussing/expounding W3C process issues?

It's not ideal, but it's not clear that there's a better option
in this case, given the nature of the issue that was raised;
these changes are motivated by discussion of
exactly that question, on 8 July:

hmm.. seeming less and less like an architectural principle and more
like w3c process issue.

IJ: The text must be in spec, but isn't required to be registered.

DC: Area directors said "Don't want to put in the registry until it goes
to Rec." They prefer to just have internet draft published every 6
months. They would rather your type not be in registry but not in
internet draft index.

CL: What can we point to when people tell us we are doing it wrong?

TB: I agree with DO's point that this is a process issue. Let's rewrite
finding to say that registration process must proceed in parallel with
w3c process, and documents must be readily available from w3c specs.

DC: Water down more: Registration information is relevant and needs to
be reviewed along with everything else in your spec.

IJ: Please note current best practice as we understand it.

TB: if we write a strong arch principle saying "You have to get this
work done" then that is enough for the Director to stand on.

PC: I think we need a cookbook for chairs on what to do.DO: I'd rather
us spend more time on arch principles and our issues list.

Particularly given that the TAG has substantial consensus... it's
irritating that we have to keep investing time on this. If we want a
cookbook, how do we get it?

DC: I agree that this is process, but who do we hand this to?

PC: Our finding should say "here lie alligators" if uncertain process.

Action PC: Propose alternative wording for finding.

  -- http://www.w3.org/2002/07/08-tag-summary#media-types

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2002 09:16:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:34 UTC