Re: Locus of API discussion

On 19/07/2013 10:24 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2013, at 2:44 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>
>>     Three weeks ago I posted a summary of discussion points that came up in the WebRTC World conference (most of which had to do with the WebRTC API). To date, I have not received a reply from any of the people you have listed. I am unable to gather the necessary momentum to turn these points into action items without your help. I was/am frustrated that the spec editors and vendors are responsible to engage the community on these matters, but did not. I hope this clarifies what I meant.
> Many of us have been very busy updating drafts for ietf deadline so it as been a hard time to respond.
Hi Cullen,

     Welcome back :)

     That's understandable but next time might I suggest you reply 
immediately with: "You bring up good points but I am busy updating 
drafts for the ietf deadline. I'll reply as soon as I get this done..." 
At least then there is an acknowledgement that my points are being taken 
into consideration and an expectation that a response will arrive in the 
near future. The current process is very broken. We have a lot of 
discussions on the mailing list without any concrete action items. When 
a discussion thread goes unanswered, there is no follow-up. On the one 
hand, most organizations don't conduct such long discussions over a bug 
tracker but on the other hand a bug tracker provides the assurance that 
an issue will remain open until it is resolved to everyone's mutual 
satisfaction. Issues don't close silently as happens on mailing lists. 
We need to find a way to fix our process.

     Another thing I don't understand: As far as I know, the Working 
Group consists of 
http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=47318&public=1&order=org. 
That's around 78 people, yet none of them followed up on this. Where is 
the list of Working Group members that have an obligation to follow-up 
on these kind of posts? Meaning, who could I reasonably expect to reply?

Thanks,
Gili

Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 15:54:53 UTC