Re: Getting the ball rolling on a better W3C process

On Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich wrote:

> Hi Dom,
>  
> Absolutely. The list is a result of brainstorming, which is by definition subjective :-)
> I take such points as hints that there is an issue hidden underneath.
>  
> The core issues will have to be brought to the surface and that will be part of the challenge as we progress.
>  
> One way of doing that would be to create a questionnaire, perhaps for the AC, to ask them to back up the individual points made with concrete examples.
>  
> We should not try to change W3C process unless there is a sufficient sample size that says there is in fact a problem.
> But we also need to keep in mind that only the vocal few will in fact complain and the rest will remain silent.
>  
> Another method would be to look at the points based on the experience already present in CG, work out a clear problem statement and reflect that back to the WGs for commentary for correctness.
>  
>  
> Once we have captured whatever people feel is the set of problems, we can work on solutions.
> Dependencies, paint points and particular documents or parts thereof will become apparent in the process.
>  


We should also capture what we want to achieve with the process and then evaluate if we are actually achieving that with the current process.  

E.g., heartbeat snapshots inform community (good)… implementers base implementation on heartbeat snapshot and then refuse to change (bad).

Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 14:16:54 UTC