- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 17:22:32 +0200
- To: Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: "public-coremob@w3.org Mobile" <public-coremob@w3.org>
On Jun 4, 2012, at 15:30 , Arthur Barstow wrote: >>> Also, since it appears a lot of CG members will not attend this f2f meeting, is the expectation that any "decision" made during the meeting will be tentative, pending input from folks that do not attend the meeting? >> Decisions made at the meeting will be binding, people who cannot attend are welcome to provide their input ahead of time and it will be included in the discussion. > > Boo, hiss, especially since the agenda is mostly unconference style and there may not be voice conference for remote attendees. I don't see much of a point in getting religious about this. Most of the discussion has to do with actually getting things done, i.e. producing tests. I don't see the value in delaying action on these by requiring asynchronous input before people can actually get stuff done. Furthermore, the usual W3C practice always applies: any decision can be reopened provided that new substantial input that wasn't previously covered is brought to light. So just doing things the usual way works in favour of non-participants, provided they have something to say. Finally, the topics that the f2f will look at have all been discussed on the list before. It's not as if people haven't had a chance to voice their opinions several times over. Now if there are specific areas of concern that you would like to bring up and that can help raise the useful technical input to meta-process discussions ratio we're all ears! -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 4 June 2012 16:53:52 UTC