- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 10:14:49 -0500
- To: public-vc-wg@w3.org
On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 6:47 PM <meetings@w3c-ccg.org> wrote: > The audio recording is intended to be deleted after minutes are published, to align with traditional meeting minute practices. I just remembered the reason why the audio/video recording probably shouldn't be deleted. The transcription isn't always accurate, and things can be transcribed incorrectly that might have negative legal consequences for those speaking. In that event, we can always fall back to the recording to see what the person actually said. I believe this is the same policy that IETF uses for their auto-transcription mechanism. Yes, in theory we circulate the minutes and ask people for corrections, but let's be realistic -- hardly any of us have time to read through the entire transcript and request fixes for every little transcription mistake that exists with this new technology (or really, even with human scribes). I think W3C Process should drop that charade and admit that we are all very busy people and we don't have the time to read every word of every transcript to make corrections. Therefore, archiving the audio/video is crucial to reduce workload on everyone involved. > No way to say stuff off the record There is a way to say stuff off of the record, and that's to type it into the chat window (which is not archived). > Manu Sporny: I think it should be an option for the working group to continue and that party to not say anything or for the working group to say that sorry this is the way we operate. my concern here is that you can have one person throw off the entirety of the meeting,… Another option here is: If you are going to object, then you have to scribe the meeting. -- manu -- Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Thursday, 8 January 2026 15:15:31 UTC