Re: [testing] draft of liaison letter [ISSUE-65]

I'm fine with all of Giuseppe's suggestions.

mav

On Apr 2, 2013, at 6:06 AM, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com<mailto:giuseppep@opera.com>> wrote:

I agree with all Mark wrote, with few minor comments:

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 02:56:47 +0100, Vickers, Mark <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com<mailto:Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com>> wrote:


 I suggest replacing this whole paragraph just asking them to email back to whomever sends this.

and asking them about the desired confidentiality of the response, as pointed out by the other mail from Mark.


Please use the following values under the "Reference" column:

  *   P = The indicated specification is already referenced in one of your published specifications.
  *   F = The indicated specification will be referenced in one of your future published specifications.
  *   N (or blank) = You have no official plans to reference the indicated specification.

Please use the following values under the "Testing" column:

  *   M = Testing of the indicated specification is mandatory.
  *   O = Testing of the indicated specification is optional.
  *   N (or blank) = Not used

Suggest: N = There will be no testing of this specification.

Perhaps add another column DATE NEEDED and ask them to enter a rough timeframe when the tests would be needed, like "Now" or "Q1 2014".

We also encourage you to edit or add to our use cases here (http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Testing/Web_%26_TV_Testing_Discussions).

I'd leave out all these side issues and requests for participation. Those can come in follow-up communication. Let's keep the message focussed on the survey only and not a general engagement,

We can still add it at the very end a short mention to our activity with a request to get back to us in case there is an interested in being more engaged.


We wish to establish a liaison communication relationship with your organization, particularly with those groups within your organization that may be working on specifications that reference W3C specifications in general, and the HTML5 specification in particular. We welcome an appointed member from your organization to serve as a formal liaison between our organizations. At this time, we have appointed [INSERT NAME] to be our liaison to your organization.

Of course, some groups already have liaisons.

indeed, see here http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison (search for "Web and TV" inside the page)


Perhaps we can just end with a general catch-all invitation, something like:

Feel free to also contact me concerning any additional issues, such as liaison relationships, participation in the W3C testing activity or information on any other W3C efforts.

That could also work.


Thanks,
Clarke Stevens

Again, I think this should come from Staff. Maybe Kaz or Philipp?

So far I've sent the liaison letters myself as co-chair. I think we can keep doing it as far as the W3C liaison team is in the loop.

/g

--
Giuseppe Pascale
Product Manager TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software