- From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:13:10 -0400
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org WG" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, public-rdf-comments Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <62312994-252E-479F-8F42-7A5D50FDDAB3@3roundstones.com>
> CONCRETE PROPOSAL: (a) Change the subscription and posting policy of the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to allow people who are not working group members to subscribe to that list and post to that list. (b) When a comment or proposal is sent to public-rdf-comments@w3.org, encourage followup discussion to take place on the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list. Thank you for your concrete proposal, David. The RDF WG chairs will not unreasonably withhold comments from the public-ref-comments mailing list if continued discussion is necessary. However, we will disallow permathreads from developing on this forum. Regards, Dave -- http://about.me/david_wood On Jun 19, 2013, at 14:03, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > I appreciate the difficulty that is caused by having so many messages sent to public-rdf-wg@w3.org , but the practical implications of the policy below seem problematic. > > When a comment or proposal is sent to the public-rdf-comments@w3.org list, frequently there are important followup questions and explanations. If those are posted to "semantic-web@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org, other mailing lists", how would the commenter be assured that the working group would see them? > > I think the root of the problem is the fact that the regular RDF working group mailing list is only open to members of that group. Other than the public-rdf-comments@w3.org list, there *is* no other public communication channel available for people who are not WG members to communicate with the RDF working group. That is a problem. I believe it was an unintended consequence of the decision to limit the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to working group members (to avoid spam?). > > CONCRETE PROPOSAL: (a) Change the subscription and posting policy of the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list to allow people who are not working group members to subscribe to that list and post to that list. (b) When a comment or proposal is sent to public-rdf-comments@w3.org, encourage followup discussion to take place on the public-rdf-wg@w3.org list. > > Thanks, > David Booth > > On 06/19/2013 11:43 AM, David Wood wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The purpose of the public-rdf-comments mailing list is to ensure that >> members of the public may suggest changes to or raise concerns about >> specifications managed by the RDF Working Group. Importantly, the >> RDF WG has a requirement to ensure that each public comment is >> formally addressed. That is very hard for us to accomplish when >> detailed and long-running design discussions take place on that >> list. >> >> We discussed the management of the public-rdf-comments list during >> today's telecon and decided that long-running conversations should >> not take place on that list. Members of the public wishing to hold >> such discussions are encouraged to do so on semantic-web@w3.org, >> public-lod@w3.org, other mailing lists or via interpersonal >> communications. >> >> Members of the public should therefore limit traffic on >> public-rdf-comments to concrete proposals to change RDF WG >> specifications. The public-rdf-comments mailing list should not be >> copied on messages to other mailing lists. >> >> Members of the RDF WG should refrain from replying to >> public-rdf-comments without permission of the WG chairs. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Regards, Dave -- http://about.me/david_wood >> >> >>
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 18:13:26 UTC