Re: face to face meeting host offers for the HTML WG?

Hi Chris,

On Mar 20, 2007, at 9:19 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:

> Joining any W3C WG requires a process internal to Microsoft to review
> the intellectual property and legal ramifications of that  
> participation.
> Under the W3C Patent Policy, I would hope any of you in sizable
> organizations have to do the same thing.  At any rate, I could not
> possibly have started said review until the WG had a final  
> charter.  The
> ensuing three weeks has been a result of timing with my travel.  I am
> working on it now.  I expect it will take at least a week; it may take
> more, it depends on what IP conflicts legal turns up.

Good luck and godspeed with your review process. Please don't make  
this a personal matter. I think people are impatient to start work  
within the new working group, but many are hesitant to proceed  
without one of the co-chairs being present. All discussion of your co- 
chairmanship on the list has been entirely in that context.

Some also have a suspicion of Microsoft in a standards context, and  
it's not entirely unfair to claim Microsoft has abused the standards  
process at times in the past. However, I hope we can all assume good  
faith in this case and have some patience with their approval  


> You seem to have a personal problem with me being co-chair of this
> group.  You've stated your objections, and the W3C chose (partly based
> on those, I imagine, though I have no actual knowledge) to have a
> co-chair (my esteemed colleague Dan).  Despite your continued  
> claims, I
> was not "chosen" - I was asked, based on my history of involvement  
> with
> the web and with HTML.  You appear to continue to have an issue.  You
> claim  to represent others' opinions as well here.  I would like to
> suggest, in that case, that the current members of the WG ("invited
> experts" as well, as far as I'm concerned) take a vote to decide if  
> they
> want me to be co-chair or not.
> I would be happy (as I've previously stated) to not have that
> responsibility, and I certainly have tremendous confidence and respect
> for Dan, and would support him as sole chair (I was delighted when he
> told me he was signing up to co-chair).  Your continued sniping is
> making it harder for me to feel like I could do a good job ensuring  
> that
> the perspectives of those such as yourself is properly honored,  
> which as
> I've said since the beginning was my goal - to reconcile the goals of
> those who started the WHATWG with the patent policy and views of the
> W3C.  I do not like being called a joke, nor do I like being  
> accused of
> being disingenuous.  If this is the way the WG members are going to  
> be,
> then I cannot in good conscience believe I can help as chair.
> As for FTF meeting - I've offered to host at Microsoft, but really  
> don't
> care.  I have also begun making plans to attend XTech, since it seems
> there will be a large set of the HTML WG people there.  I have one
> potential conflicting time block that I cannot change, from June 12th
> through the 26th.  Other than that time period, I will show up
> whenever/wherever, and you don't need to wait on me getting permission
> to join the WG to plan that.
> -Chris
> PS - Dan, I expect this will bounce off the public-html list since I'm
> not subscribed, please forward it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Connolly []
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 6:27 AM
> To: Daniel Glazman; Chris Wilson
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: face to face meeting host offers for the HTML WG?
> On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 06:04 +0100, Daniel Glazman wrote:
>> On 19/03/2007 23:49, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>> We're still short a co-chair, so I'm still not inclined
>>> to make group decisions of this sort, yet.
>> Dan, sorry to say, but this begins to be a big joke,
>> and unfortunately a very shocking one. Microsoft was associated
>> to the creation of this WG and whatever is blocking them right
>> now should have been a resolved problem at least months ago.
>> Because I discussed this with other members of the Group, I think
>> I will express many people's opinion here : could the W3C please ping
>> Microsoft, and use not only an email/phone call but also a needle ?
> Well, I flew down to Austin to talk to Chris in person a week
> ago.
> Chris, can you give us an ETA?
>> This is enough, and they should be here right now.
>> What was the extreme urgency to approve the charter before WHATWG
> review
>> and approval if the Group just cannot start because we still miss a
>> co-chairman who was chosen as co-chairman almost A YEAR AGO ?
>> </Daniel>
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C
> D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 19:41:29 UTC