- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:00:12 +0100
- To: "Jeff Jaffe" <jeff@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:30:03 +0100, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote: >> On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:02:12 +0100, Arthur Barstow >>> So among the problems I see are: >> >>> PAGs suck (time, resources, joy from the WG, etc.); ... > My preferred solution may not be realistic, but I'll throw it in. I think it is a realistic activity to pursue. I think it may improve the situation sometimes, and will allow some companies to sit on a comfortable moral high ground. I don't think it is a solution to the problem, but since it doesn't seem to conflict with any likely solution, and does seem likely to ameliorate the situation, I think it is a great thing for you to try, Jeff. ;) cheers > Everyone endorses the theme that the core of the Web should be a RF > zone. Especially if it applies to someone else's patents. If it's 'my' > own patents - then sometimes I'm not so sure. > > I think we could write a set of principles that characterize the theme > "core of the Web should be RF". This would not be part of our formal > process, patent policy, or member agreement (because then too many > Corporate legal departments would object). Then we should get a set of > senior CTOs in the industry who agree (as a group) to work together with > the entire Membership in respecting this theme. I believe that such a > moral support for RF would reduce the need for PAGs. > >> >> cheers >> -- Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 12:00:44 UTC