- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:20:23 -0400
- To: ext Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- CC: "public-vision-newstd@w3.org" <public-vision-newstd@w3.org>
On 6/23/10 6:37 AM, ext Harry Halpin wrote: >> Le mardi 22 juin 2010 à 14:12 -0500, Ian Jacobs a écrit : >> >>> Given discussion last week and comments since then, I've created a >>> simpler survey: >>> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/newstd2/?login >>> >>> Please let me know whether you think this would be useful for >>> gathering information that will help us create useful proposals. >>> >> I think the set of data that it intends to capture is reasonable, but I >> still don't think a formal survey is the right way to gather the data. >> >> In other words, I think that what we should do is to distribute action >> items to gather the said data for the various use cases we've >> identified; the gathering of some of this data may require asking >> information from some people, but that's much more likely better done on >> an ad-hoc basis, adapted to each and everyone communication preferences, >> rather than through a one-size-fits all survey. >> > I agree with gathering said data via use-cases (that's what the Social Web > XG is trying to do) but let's also use this survey, as I think it covers > the bases and I often find survey results surprising. > > Next step might be to think of where to send it, i.e. both within and > without w3c. > Seems like a survey would be a reasonable way to get feedback from some individuals and orgs and that more direct dialogue will work better for others. As such, as Harry suggests, perhaps both methods should be used/tried. Re next step, perhaps it would be useful to try these mechanisms with a few people and/or orgs before a broad(ish) deployment. >> Some nits on the survey, should it be still used as-is: >> * "no F2F", "no teleconf" can hardly be called an offering >> > However, some "standardization" communities like the microformat community > prefer this, considering teleconfs too time-consuming and f2fs too > expensive. So maybe not an "offering" but an option. > Unacceptable overhead (e.g. mandatory meetings) is surely a non-starter for some individuals so a clear message the W3C can relax some of its rules is an important message. -Art Barstow
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 11:21:37 UTC