Re: discretion in adding issues [was: respecification of document.write...]

Hi Shawn,

Just to follow up on the meta redirect issue, I believe there were  
other discussion, but the issue originate with this thread[1]. So it’s  
not a good idea to simply perform a  search on the email archives and  
claim that a thread therefore doesn't exist. Again, I think it shows  
bad faith to suggest these are simply my issues just because you  
weren't a part of the original deliberations.

In any event, I've now added that thread to the wiki page. I think the  
wiki can actually serve a valuable role (as it has for the alt issue)  
in between the issue-tracker system and the deliberations of the WG on  
email, IRC and teleconf.

Take care,
Rob

[1]: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Aug/thread.html#msg340 
 >






> On May 31, 2008, at 1:07 AM, Shawn Medero wrote:
>
> here's not a ground swell of discussion about ["UA norm for redirects
> (both META and http)"][1]. I'm not just saying this from memory... if
> I do [a really simple search for "redirect" across public-html][2] I'd
> don't see any discussion about your exact issue until you raised it.
> That you took the time to document a potential issue and start a
> thread about it is good... that you presumed "it will be added to the
> issue-tracker in time" is inappropriate.




>> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would really like to see you and others in this WG show a little  
>>> more
>>> respect to your colleagues on the WG — most of whom are also  
>>> volunteering
>>> their valuable time.
>>
>> I think you read too much into my comments, Robert. I'm not
>> criticizing you personally and I have sneaky suspicion that all of
>> this could be resolved over a beer at our next face-to-face meeting
>> (Oct 2008, France it looks like.... unless there's another impromptu
>> gathering between now and then... or you live near Seattle.)
>
> That may be, but this WG has had problems from the start and much of  
> my time has been spent trying to get participants to stop talking  
> past each other and come up with genuine solutions. It is very  
> difficult when we have an editor that frequently talks in riddles  
> about only permitting meritorious proposals into the draft and not  
> those held by majority opinion while others insist that meritorious  
> proposals should not be considered until we get a majority in favor  
> of it.
>
> As I look down the list of issues I've recently raised (and others  
> that I have not yet raised), these are almost all issue that should  
> have already been dealt with by the editor without the need for me  
> to raise them again. It's not always easy to find this information  
> by searching the email and IRC archives which is why I haven't  
> gotten around to adding all of the relevant emails yet. For  
> instance, the issue of meta element redirects you said you couldn't  
> find in the archives. Yet I know I had a discussion with members of  
> this WG over email about it  IIRC, the discussion included Gregory  
> Roasmaita and at least one other hostile participant (for some  
> perspective, I count a hostile participant as someone who rejects or  
> otherwise criticizes a proposal for adding too much implementation  
> complexity when the proposal doesn't call for addin any  
> implementation at all[1]). I will take a look to find where those  
> messages ended up when I get some time: simply gather together this  
> information and drafting the wiki pages has taken a significant  
> portion of my time already.
>
> Sorry I don't live near Seattle, otherwise Id buy the first round.
>
> Take care,
> Rob
>
> [1]: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008May/0735.html 
> >