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

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:03:40 +0100, Chris Wilson  
<> wrote:

> I want to evolve HTML.  I thought at one point, apparently naively, that
> since I could see both sides of the issue - the value of both the WHATWG
> goals and the W3C IP policy and process - that perhaps I could help here
> and make this a better world.

I really hope you will, and I see value in your position as well,  
including the fact that you work in Microsoft as the platform architect of  
Internet Explorer. I see it as extremely important that you, other  
Microsoft representatives and in the end Internet Explorer embrace the  
ideas and solutions we come to in this Working Group and I hope other  
members of the WG sees this as too valuable to ignore too.

> I can't do that and fight personal battles at the same time.  I feel
> I've been doing that, being accused of making some kind of secret
> back-room deals or something that I simply haven't been doing.

To be honest; just ignore all remarks you find to be personal. It's not  
worth your time, and not ours either.

> Perhaps this just caught me at a bad time; Daniel's mail to me seemed to
> imply that a sizable portion of the group does not want me to be  
> co-chair.

I did not read that into what Daniel wrote, and for whatever it's worth,  
he didn't speak on my behalf if he so did.

> If you collectively don't think it's a good idea to have me as co-chair,
> then I'd prefer not to waste my time, and I'm sure Dan will do a fine
> job.  I'm asking for a vote of confidence (or not) from the rest of the
> group.  My feelings are not going to be hurt either way.

My vote would be for you to continue as a chair of this WG, if such a vote  
were to be held. I can't see any reason for it to come to that, though.

> Regardless of my co-chairship, someone from Microsoft will participate
> in this WG.  I've said that before, it continues to be true.  Even if I
> am co-chair, I've said I think it might be a good idea to have a
> different Microsoft WG representative.

I agree; we need more Microsoft representatives here.

> I'm sorry we have not been agile in getting approval for that
> participation; I take full personal responsibility for that.  It has
> been an accident of very poor timing, a somewhat lengthy process that
> we must follow internal to Microsoft for due diligence, and my own
> time management that has caused this delay, not necessarily in that
> order.  It is not due to a lack of interest or desire.

I believe this is what Daniel was asking for, namely a "ping" from you and  
a status report of what was going on and why it was taking so long for you  
and other Microsoft representatives to join and start participating in the  
WG. An e-mail one, two or three weeks ago stating what you just did would  
not have brought up this discussion, I'm sure.

Asbjørn Ulsberg     -=|=-
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 20:29:57 UTC