- From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 18:28:28 -0400
- To: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
- Cc: "'Arnaud Le Hors'" <lehors@us.ibm.com>, <public-vision-newstd@w3.org>
Hi Lawrence, Le 7 juil. 2010 à 13:00, Lawrence Rosen a écrit : > Apparently, for some, the requirement to define the scope of the innovation desired in the specification is itself often an impediment to innovation. The feeling of burden about the process is very common and on many different parts. Each person having its own devil. Most of the comments often come from people who have been in small organization and/or are beginning with standardization works. Usually not a long history. The W3C Process document has not been created in one day. It contains a lot of history, … more exactly stories. Often, each additional piece of the process has been justified by something happening, a voice from the community, a reproach, etc. BUT *that* is lost. The storytelling of W3C Process is not visible. It looks a table of laws without flesh and indeed it seems dry, burdensome, and painful. Maybe the Process document could be greatly improved if it was connected to specific stories justifying the way it is built. (not in the Process document, but linked from the Process document). It would give a more human rendition of the history. That said, it doesn't mean that it should not be simplified or organized differently for some groups and/or activities. -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:40:26 UTC