Re: Next steps and note to mailing list about Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct

On 02/20/2015 01:40 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Harry Halpin wrote:
>> However, several times on this mailing list we've had behavior, both
>> onlist and even off-list, that some are viewing as not particularly
>> constructive. In response to these complaints, we'd like to draw the
>> attention of everyone to the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct:
>> We understand that e-mails are often sent in haste and emotions can run
>> high, but we must remember to treat each other with respect,
>> professionalism, fairness, and sensitivity to our many differences and
>> strengths. While we have perhaps been lax in this, from now on we will
>> enforce our Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct:  patterns of
>> behavior that systematically violate the code of conduct will be
>> referred to an ombudsman for determination of next steps, and a personal
>> note will be sent beforehand.
> I do not agree with any of that, but I would welcome if you would stop
> your personal attacks against Anders Rundgren on this list, e.g.
>   *
>   *

Thanks Bjoern, but note on both posts that I was referring to his past
prognostications about WebCrypto not being implemented are factually
incorrect [1]. Of course debates over work items outside the scope of
the original charter are still up for debate, but rather than
prognostications we are looking for technical arguments, and we are
encouraging his technical arguments as long as they are not inflammatory.

In fact, WebCrypto - which was originally broached as a concept by
Mozilla's DOMCrypt although the W3C standard ended up much different and
more flexible thanks to the hard work of the WG and editors -  has been
implemented across all major browsers. It did take considerable time and
effort, but everyone involved in open standardization should be aware of
that this is to be expected.

Again, keep their arguments on this mailing list on the subject to the
technical level. If people do not feel like standardization is useful
and cannot for whatever personal reason operate with professionalism,
fairness, and sensitivity, we at W3C simply ask they simply use their
talents elsewhere.  After all, this is a technical standardization
mailing list.



Received on Friday, 20 February 2015 02:18:08 UTC