- From: Brian May via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 16:26:41 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
@dmarti makes a good point: it makes sense to use an existing venue and tooling if we can. I suppose we’d want some way of signaling that PATCG is considering such early stage proposals and a directory listing the proposals we’ve considered, their status within this group and appropriate links. Beyond that, I think we would do well to clearly and concisely articulate the criteria and conditions for adding and removing proposals from PATCG, regardless of how things are ultimately structured, including obligations and limitations that must be agreed to before bringing a proposal to this group, and particularly those which survive the removal of a proposal from consideration. I also think we would do well to be sensitive to the cognitive burden we place on the members of PATCG, many of whom are chronically over extended as they struggle to keep up with the mounting tide of activity in the space; much as we might want PATCG to be the center of our universe, it no doubt will always be one of many. So, the more we can do to structure things in ways that reduce the effort to engage (like maintaining a directory of work, separating active proposals from inactive and consistently and concisely noting why we’ve decided a proposal will not be pursued), the more productive we will be and the more likely we are to engage domain experts from the broader community whose help we badly need and many of who are only able to make a casual commitment to the work. -- GitHub Notification of comment by bmayd Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/proposals/issues/4#issuecomment-1065273753 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 11 March 2022 16:26:43 UTC