- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 01:57:35 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 03:04 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Dan Connolly wrote: > > ... It says: > > > > "If you see any reason that this teleconference shouldn't happen at all, > > please put it in a comment." > > -- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/tel29mar/ > > Sure... it would be nice if we could see a tally of simple "yes" vs "no" > results for whether we want a telecon at all, though. Surely adding a > simple yes/no question would not be difficult. Could we add one? I'm happy to take advice in the comments field, but I don't have any use for single-bit "no, I prefer that the WG not hold a teleconference this week" answers. Even if there are more "no" answers than "yes" answers, the people who give "yes" answers are likely to make for a useful meeting. > > And it doesn't assume that a telecon is a good idea; it's > > explicit about my reasons for calling one... > > "It seems we have enough agenda topics and issues[1] to merit a > > teleconference." > > [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/il16 > > Sure, but this assumes that calling a teleconference is a good thing, > which, it would seem, is a matter of opinion. Some people might argue that > no amount of agenda topics would merit a teleconference. They are welcome to make such arguments. Perhaps they will persuade me to change my opinion. I'll let you all know by T-24 hours, when the agenda (or cancellation notice) is due. But currently, after the recent email blizzard, and with XTech representing a rare opportunity to get together face-to-face but also quite an organizational challenge as far as a WG face-to-face meeting, I'm pretty firmly of the opinion that a teleconference is worthwhile. As I wrote when I announced the agenda/issues list, I think periodic reconciliation rituals are very important to keep email work effective... On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 16:22 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/il16 > > I'm used to the combination of a mailing list and a > weekly teleconference. Once a week, the chair prepares > an agenda that carries over a few things from last week, > plus picks up some of the new threads that don't seem > to be taking care of themselves in email. If you weren't > satisfied with the response you got by email, you can show > up at the teleconference and clarify or try to raise the > priority. If you couldn't read all the mail that went > on that list, you can at least look at the agenda to see > what the high priority things are. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 06:57:46 UTC