- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:12:15 -0700
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: <www-talk@w3.org>
But is it realistic? Doesn't the W3C has a contract with its Members regarding the release of Member-confidential information? It cuts both ways; opening the archives would expose the Consortium to lawsuits from any and every Member that is or ever was. From what I can see, the W3C is making the live lists of more and more WGs public-accessible, in addition to their public status reports [1]. That's commendable. Regarding participation, that is a radical change in the nature of the Consortium, and personally I doubt its wisdom. The W3C is a Consortium, not the IETF. 1. http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/groups.html#three-month-rule On Monday, April 8, 2002, at 03:12 AM, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >> be it resolved that we [...] ask the immediate inclusion >> of all people as invited experts in all groups organized >> within the W3C. We respectfully ask that the W3C >> leadership approve this invitation without delay, and >> provide for unrestricted access to all W3C "members >> only" archives and discussion groups, and announce the >> availability of this information [...] > > This is a highly commendable goal (and one that I fully support), > but has anything come of it yet? All I know is that there is > still a significant corpus that will benefit the Web community at > large hidden behind the W3C's draconian and wholly unecessary > privacy veil. > > -- > Kindest Regards, > Sean B. Palmer > @prefix : <http://purl.org/net/swn#> . > :Sean :homepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> . > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 13:12:29 UTC