traffic shaping on the list

Since I can't attend the teleconference at which this topic is to be
discussed, my best option is to comment here, at the expense of bandwidth.

It isn't clear whether "traffic shaping" is meant in the agenda as a polite
substitute for "traffic reduction", but either way, it is beyond contention
that this is a high-traffic list. Given the size and complexity of the spec,
combined with the many proposals and issues requiring discussion, this is to
some extent inevitable, but I think it would be helpful to adopt conventions
(if this hasn't been done already) to make it easier to identify proposals and
issues. For example, having "proposal" in the subject line of a message
proposing changes to the spec, and some conventions about what should be
included in a proposal, would be helpful. Detailed reviews are already well
flagged in subject lines, and from what I have read over the last several
days, participants are keeping subject lines reasonably in order.

Surveys, or requests for voting on/responding to proposals could also be
flagged with an agreed upon keyword for the benefit of those of us in the
unfortunate position of having insufficient time to read everything, and who
may otherwise miss them.

The obvious points about keeping discussions focused on issues associated with
possible changes to the deliverables, apply, but, I trust, need hardly be
mentioned in this forum. As a newcomer, I would also appreciate details of
decision-making conventions within the group, beyond what is stated in the
Charter. As the group operates primarily by e-mail, the procedure for
ascertaining and declaring consensus, or voting, is bound to be different from
that followed by groups that make decisions primarily at teleconferences and
in face to face meetings.

I find the best way to deal with the high traffic on the list is to use the
threaded view of a mail user agent. At one point it was suggested to use
non-standard quoting conventions "for accessibility". If anyone in the group
has access needs that would be better served by non-standard quoting in posts,
these can certainly be raised as suggestions. However, some people (including
I) use tools that rely on standard quoting conventions to make reading e-mail
easier. For example, Emacspeak performs aural highlighting of quoted material.
The Mutt mail user agent, likewise, can hide or skip quoted text - provided
that standard quoting conventions are followed. This makes mail quicker to read
with a braille display, for example.

Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 03:11:32 UTC