Re: Dissatisfaction with HTML WG

On Thu, 2007-12-27 at 13:25 +1000, Ben Boyle wrote:
> I thought I would reflect -- as another author (aka "self-invited
> expert") -- on the original points of this thread: the concern that
> issues raised are being dismissed out of hand. W3C opened the doors
> for us to contribute (and this is fantastic, thank you), but I don't
> think anyone really knew how it would work.

Quite. Thanks for sharing your thoughts...

> I'd also like some cues on what to do, for example, when to read and
> comment on particular sections of the spec.

The chairs try to give cues once a week when we update
the issue tracker as input to the weekly teleconference

It's been somewhat heavy on design principles and requirements
and group process/logistics so far, but design issues are accumulating,
and I expect some of them will be ready for a group
discussion and decision in the coming weeks and months.

>  Hopefully in a timely
> manner that suits the editors, so we are then able to see and
> participate in the review/action resulting from that feedback soon
> after. That would help with feeling reviewing the spec was a useful
> contribution.

The average latency for comments on the HTML 5 spec is higher than
for most specs I have worked on, but I'm not sure that can
be helped. The size of the community around HTML is just huge,
and a large latency is somewhat natural, I'm afraid.

>  It's useful (for yourself) reviewing the spec just to
> get familiar, but I can't say I feel it is useful to the WG at this
> point.

Getting real work done naturally happens in groups smaller than...
where are we now... 492 group participants. I personally hope
to get involved in the html5lib parser test development effort.

It sounds like you're interested in working on tutorials.
As Karl pointed out, you're not alone there...
"tutorial development, quick reference, course materials, ...   49"

> I think I'll just read mails for now. In 2008, I'd like to try
> tutorials. I don't know if that will be more useful but it feels like
> it could be productive. We've got Lachie's ALA article, are there any
> others out there? Are we keeping a list?
> Enjoy the rest of 2007!
> cheers,
> Ben
Dan Connolly, W3C
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2008 19:12:23 UTC