- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:02:29 -0700
- To: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
- Cc: "jicheu@yahoo.fr" <jicheu@yahoo.fr>, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>, W3C Members <w3c-ac-forum@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:27 , Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com> wrote: > > On Aug 6, 2014, at 11:44 PM, Jean-Charles (JC) Verdié <jicheu@yahoo.fr> wrote: > >> I am all in favor of more openness (when/where it makes sense) >> I am all opposed to carrying misleading information. > > I think it'd be pretty difficult to suggest we want to be more open while rejecting a new CG on the sole basis that its name *can* be interpreted as a criticism. I can’t connect this, so that means I can’t work out (I think) what you think the definition of ‘open’ is. Can you explain a little more? Open, to me, means that the group is accessible to anyone, and that people can track its work, comment if they like, and even make proposals for work etc. I cannot see any link to the management of reasonable titles for community groups at all. David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2014 21:03:21 UTC