- From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 11:40:57 -0800
- To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Cc: W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: > > So, shortening to 60 will bring more implementers, but shortening to 30 > would bring yet more? I prefer to think of it as, "60-minute meetings will prevent many implementors from attending. 90-minute meetings will prevent even more form attending." Shortening the time would force the working group to use that meeting time to address the issues that mattered most. This is better for all the attendees, whoever they are. > Yet, how are they to be heard, with less time per implementer? Substantive details should always first be discussed on list, not in the phone meetings. Phone calls should only be for recurring issues that cannot be resolved on the list. > This logic seems quite strange to me. The request is not about bringing on new implementors. That's just a bonus. The request is about effectively using the time of the members that are already involved.
Received on Monday, 3 November 2014 19:41:24 UTC