- From: Geoff Deering <gdeering@acslink.net.au>
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:44:47 +1100
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Cc: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>
> W3C is a consortium with a set of rules ("The Process Document")
> designed to ensure that the massive variety of stakeholders get some
> kind of accountability, whether or not they are actual members of the
> Consortium. (This could be contrasted to many similar organisations
> with similar impact that are not prepared to make themselves so open).
> You can check these - they are published at
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/
>
etc, etc.
Hi Charles,
I have no problem with this process and support it as probably the only
way to get things done, but there does seem to need to be some other way
or avenue for people to be involved. But also, what you say about
reading the mailing list and sending timely regrets as remaining in good
standing is only born out when you render that interpretation of the
charter.
From what I see, it is only those who do this and participate in
regular teleconferences that remain in good standing, and I don't really
have a problem with that. Even you, with all your past participation
and involvement have been taken off the PIGS list.
I am also in this situation with ATAG. I am passionate about the issues
there, because like Joe, I believe a better document / recommendation
will be more readily understood, accepted and adopted by the web
community as a whole. But I have just had to agree to it's charter to
be a part of that working group. I have two voices in my head (yes, I
am mad), one saying; "For Sanity's sake Geoff, you are committing
yourself beyond all your resources", the other saying; "You have to do
this to save mankind:-)"... well not quite.. as a sit at my computer
with cape and mask.
I hope you get the drift, it's not easy for some of us to balance these
commitments, it seems to me that a lot of the people in this area have
part of their paying job description / time allocation to W3C
activities, let alone the international phone calls and international
face to faces.
I'm not asking the charter to be changed or amended as such, just to
look at something to be done for those who sincerely and passionately
want to contribute and be involved in the discussion and forging of the
recommendations. I don't know how, just that I don't want to see the
charter restrict valuable contributions. If it can be determined that
the person is at least genuinely trying to contribute to the degree they
can most facilitate, maybe that is acceptable.
I do notice however that WAI is one of the few W3C groups that is so
open to individual participation (at least I think so).
... I'll be away for a bit over a week... Internet free zone.
Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2003 19:45:12 UTC