W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2006

Objection to Debate Scheduling

From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 23:04:23 -0400
Message-Id: <8CBBA8DA-CC16-4937-81AE-B3E880A3AD87@mit.edu>
Cc: Daniel Weitzner <djweitzner@w3.org>, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Steve Bratt <steve@w3.org>, Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, David Wood <dwood@tucanatech.com>, public-rdf-in-xhtml task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
To: www-tag@w3.org


Members of the TAG,

In my capacity as chair of the RDF-in-HTML Task Force, a joint task  
force of the SWBP and HTML WGs responsible for the CURIE work-in- 
progress, I write to object to the CURIE debate scheduling at the  
upcoming May 2006 AC Meeting. I am particularly concerned that, as a  
result of this problematic process, the debate will end up  
misrepresenting the issues and, thus, cause confusion rather than  
address interesting technical issues.

I note the following points:

1) I became aware of this debate only after it was scheduled, by  
reading Steve Bratt's announcement to the AC reps.

2) To the best of my knowledge, no one on the WG or TF was notified  
of this debate prior to its announcement, let alone invited to  
participate. This morning, one week after the debate was scheduled,  
and only after I began to ask questions within the W3C, Ralph Swick,  
team member and TF/WG member, was invited to moderate.

3) To the best of my knowledge, the WG or TF has not been asked to  
submit information regarding CURIEs to help prime the debate. Note  
that CURIEs are still a work in progress, and debating them based on  
editors' drafts without the TF's input would be clearly suboptimal.

CURIEs would make a good discussion topic, and I welcome the TAG's  
interest. However, to discuss the topic without input from the Task  
Force responsible for the proposal seems improper and counter- 
productive.

As this debate has already been announced, as the issue merits  
discussion, and as I do not wish to be a stickler for process when  
such rigor might obstruct a useful technical discussion, I am *not*  
asking that this debate be cancelled. Instead, I am asking that you  
consider direct participation from members of the Task Force in  
presenting the driving motivation and issues to the AC reps.

I also ask that, in the future, closely-involved TFs and WGs be  
notified before such public debates are scheduled.

Sincerely,

-Ben Adida
ben@mit.edu
Chair, RDF-in-HTML Task Force
Received on Friday, 21 April 2006 03:04:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:39 GMT