W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-council@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Question for Chairs: Plans to use/desire for four lists? [was Re: Feedback - email lists]

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 13:02:20 -0500
Cc: public-council@w3.org
Message-Id: <979D8CDD-193F-443D-A806-41CA297A52CF@w3.org>
To: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>

On 12 Jul 2011, at 3:42 AM, Chris Mills wrote:

> On 11 Jul 2011, at 15:39, Harry Halpin wrote:
>> On 07/11/2011 01:45 AM, Gerald Oskoboiny wrote:
>>> * Dominique Hazael-Massieux<dom@w3.org>  [2011-07-01 14:33+0200]
>>>> Le vendredi 01 juillet 2011 à 22:12 +1000, ri@odrl.net a écrit :
>>>>> I am slightly confused as to why we need the 4 default email lists.
>>>> The 4 default list are:
>>>> * public-shortname : publicly archived list where only people who have
>>>> signed the CLA agreement can participate; unless I'm mistaken, anything
>>>> sent to that list can be considered as a contribution under the CLA
>>>> terms
>>>> * public-shortname-contrib: publicly archived list open to external
>>>> subscriptions where discussions with people that have not signed the CLA
>>>> agreement can participate
>>> quick correction: public-shortname is writable by anyone and the
>>> -contrib lists are writable only by those who have signed the CLA.
>> So, essentially the "public" lists are equivalent to "-comment" list in Working Groups, and the "contrib" The "internal" lists are equivalent to the "private" lists for W3C Groups.
>> Two questions for chairs of CGs:
>> 1) Does any group plan to use/want an "contrib" list?
>> 2) However, does any group plan to use/want an "internal" list?
> Hi there,
> I'm up for position of co-chair of the WebEd CG, and also fairly new to W3C procedures, etc.
> I'm thinking that in the WebEd CG, we'll want
> 1. some sort of public list for open discussions,


> and
> 2. a private list for the co-chairs and any other inner circle types we have to discuss sensitive matters. 

internal-webed@w3.org may or may not suffice. It's visible to Participants, Membership, Team.

I'll have to investigate whether we create a chairs-only list.

> But I also thought it'd be nice to consider an alternative interaction mechanism - how about a single list or forum, shared between all CGs, for discussing public stuff, and topics useful to all the CGs, which people could filter for topics of interest?

That's the W3C Forum:

  "The W3C Forum is available to anyone to start a discussion within the W3C community about ideas for new work or a new Community Group or Business Group. Through this venue you can share your ideas and find others to work with you."

Is that what you imagined?


> This might well save reinventing the wheel, as the different CGs will no doubt want to discuss topics relevant to all groups, and we might as well do it once rather than several times, plus there we will be other discussions going on that we could all benefit from, or potentially find interesting at least? This could also fill the job of number 1 described above  - it could actively cut down on number of lists needed.
> cheers,
> --
> Chris Mills
> Open standards evangelist and dev.opera.com editor
> Opera Software
> * Try our browsers: http://www.opera.com
> * Learn to build a better web, with the Opera web standards curriculum: http://www.opera.com/wsc
> * Learn about the latest open standards technologies and techniques: http://dev.opera.com

Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 18:02:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:24:15 UTC