- From: Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:55:38 +0100
- To: "Henry Story" <henry.story@gmail.com>, "Melvin Carvalho" <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: "WebID XG" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>, public-webid@w3.org, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:46:33 +0100, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > On 23 January 2012 21:01, Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com> wrote: >> We have two public mailing lists for the WebID Community Group. >> The XG mailing list has all those who subscribed to the XG mailing >> list + all the members of the WebID Community Group, while the >> public-webid mailing list only has the WebID members and those who >> joined and subscribed to that. The number of members are >> >> >> - 90 e-mail accounts for public-xg-webid@w3.org >> - 26 for public-webid@w3.org >> >> I think it would be good to close one of them as otherwise discussions >> will end up be going in parallel in both groups, and so water down the >> conversation. >> >> So the ideal may be to move everyone on public-xg-webid to public-webid. >> But if that cannot be done without asking everybody to resubscribe, >> then I think it may be better to close the public-webid mailing list, >> and stick with the weird XG legacy. > > Perhaps the CG mailing list should focus on the nitty gritty of the spec. > > And more general discussions inc. WebID return foaf-protocols, and > apps in the readwrite web group. > > The reason I suggest this is that there have been some comments about > the volume of mails on this list being a chalenge follow, so splitting > things up could allow a degree of focus. Hi all, I'm watching this thread and recommend that when you reach a decision as to the number of lists, you let us know. Thanks, Coralie -- Coralie Mercier - W3C Communications Team - http://www.w3.org W3C/ERCIM - B219 - 2004, rte des lucioles - 06410 Biot - FR mailto:coralie@w3.org +33492387590 http://www.w3.org/People/CMercier/
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 07:55:48 UTC