- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:17:46 -0500
- To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
- Cc: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 11:30 -0400, Al Gilman wrote: > Good points. > > On 9 Apr 2008, at 4:17 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > I happened to find this curious statement in the IRC logs of a > > third WG: > > "Gregory: We (WAI) arranged a special meeting with HTML5 people to > > discuss Aria, and no one from HTML5 turned up" > > "... so we are ignoring them for the moment" > > http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/xhtml/20080402#l-139 Gregory said something like that in a recent HTML WG teleconference as well; I got the impression that there was some recent attempt to set up a teleconference and it didn't work out for various reasons. Such is life. > This demonstrates the downside potential of too much public visibility. > Things can get taken out of context, and taken too seriously. The cost of a few clarification mail messages is modest... > > On a more general note: > > > > Face-to-face meeting and telecons are problematic for discussing > > detailed technical things like language integration, because people > > don't have the opportunity to re-study drafts, write test cases and > > do research in order to make informed statements and change their > > opinions based on verified information in the middle of the > > conversation. Moreover, by charter[1], the HTML WG "primarily > > conducts its technical work on a Public mailing list public-html". > > After all, face-to-face meetings and telecons would discriminate > > against a substantial number of HTML WG participants. Meanwhile, email isn't perfect either; the occasional supplementary teleconference, IRC chat, etc. can help quite a bit. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 21:18:47 UTC