- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 20:58:25 +0800
- To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- CC: W3C Site Comemnts <site-comments@w3.org>
(Cc- www-style +site-comments as this is off topic and has become annoying. For people who doesn't know about this thread. This is from [1]) [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jan/thread#msg114 (12/01/06 20:19), Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: > Ok, spec editors _and_ implementors. Please don't categorize people in such way. This doesn't contribute to any argument at all since there are people on the list who is neither spec editors and implementers but prefer mailing list. I for one is such a person and I don't believe that I am the only one (OK, just noticed that Julian Reschke got annoyed too). Consider, for example, people who you call Web developers: * Django[2] uses Google Groups (but calls them mailing lists). If you think Google Groups is satisfactory already then I think you might want to ask W3C staff here to see if this is doable. * jQuery[3] uses custom forums (but calls them mailing lists from the main page). If this indeed what you are imaging, please ask W3C staff here to see if they are willing to commit effort to port that software to W3C. I haven't used them so actually I don't it it's satisfactory to me. Note that www-style is closer in complexity of the technology to Django than jQuery and I haven't mentioned Linux, LLVM, PHP and all those you are not going to call Web developers-related, and browsers projects are bigger than those in terms of lines of codes. If you are willing to make the effort, please talk to the W3C staff here. Please consider the path suggested in [4] too. [2] https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/contributing/?from=olddocs [3] http://docs.jquery.com/Discussion [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jan/0183
Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 13:01:26 UTC