Re: Coordination

On 12/04/2013 17:46 , Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 4/12/13 11:41 AM, Rick Waldron wrote:
>> I don't think it's unreasonable, I'm subscribed to (and read all of)
>> both listsóbecause it's important to me. I doubt I'm the only one
>> willing to bridge this gap.
> I'm not saying it's unreasonable for someone to be subscribed to both.
> I'm saying expecting _everyone_ to do it is not reasonable, given
> traffic volumes.

That's certainly true. Especially since it wouldn't involve being 
subscribed to "both", but being subscribed to a rather long list of 
lists: WebApps, DAP, SysApps, HTML, WHATWG, Web Audio, Web Crypto, Web 
Performance, Media Capture, www-dom, SVG, a few RDF lists, and a bunch 
more that I can't recall off the top of my head. And this doesn't even 
get into Community Groups that might at some point move on to producing 

I'd love to someone to take this on, but it's a lot to ask of anyone.

>> TC39 and other participants of es-discuss will commit to cc'ing
>> public-script-coord whenever the subject matter is appropriate.
> That would be awesome.

Yes, I think that would already be of great help.

>  From the other direction, I think expecting W3C spec editors to cc
> public-script-coord on basic things like "here is an API we're
> designing" is a totally reasonable expectation.  In fact, I would
> support making it part of a FPWD publication checklist.

That's the conclusion I reached too, and I'm agitating internally to see 
how we could make sure it happens. A lot of people have the reflex of 
thinking "Last Call" for this, but altogether too often these things are 
already implemented at LC (we're lucky when they're not already shipped 
when we start reviewing them...) so I agree that much sooner would be 

I'll take that as the plan and see if we can make it happen.

Robin Berjon - - @robinberjon

Received on Monday, 15 April 2013 08:44:07 UTC