On 04/13/2015 05:09 PM, James M Snell wrote: > Amy: excellent analysis. Great to see. > > elf, Amy's post is quite good and I appreciate the enthusiasm but I'm > not sure there's really anything in Amy's post that needs to be > discussed on the call. We have lots of issues already that need to be > worked through. I would encourage everyone to read what Amy has put > together as well as take the time on their own to do similar analysis. > That would certainly help matters. IMO Amy's point identifies significant differences in how participants of this group may think about what and how we model. Unless Amy herself doesn't want to introduce it shortly to the group, I would really like that we can at least touch this issue even in form of 3-5 minutes introduction. Agenda for tomorrow doesn't look to heavy, especially that no one else added any topics to it: https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2015-04-14&action=history Maybe you could add topics you would like to discuss tomorrow to the agenda, and this way give everyone better chance to prepare? We have a lot of issues open in both w3c and github tracker, as well as numerous open threads on the mailing list. Since we don't use any defined milestones, not even set *pending review* status on issues and actions. I find it rather challenging to know what we will work on during next telecon :(
Received on Monday, 13 April 2015 15:48:29 UTC