W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2008

Re: discretion & the issue tracker (was Re: discretion in adding issues)

From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 04:08:20 +0200
Cc: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, connolly@w3.org, chris.wilson@microsoft.com, www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <3C3B4940-F556-41E9-968A-185C2AECDA58@robburns.com>
To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>

HI Mike,

I think the reason you're having such difficulty communicating here,  
is you're not relating your concrete opinions about this issue to the  
broader principles of the WG and the W3C. I sympathize with you when  
you lament how much of your time you're spending responding to these  
emails, but I have to wonder why you're even entering into this  
discussion. This thread started as a conversation between Dan and I: a  
conversation that had completely ended until Shawn and then you  
reignited it.

While I think everyone in the WG welcomes your enthusiasm ó itís great  
to have a staff contact take such a close interest in the daily  
activities of the WG ó you're clearly overstepping your bounds in  
suggesting the WG wants you to delete these issues from the issue- 
tracker. What the WG wants from you is to dutifully serve as a staff  
contact to the W3C, to serve as a liaison between the WG and the W3C  
and to help us all understand the procedures within which we're  
supposed to work. Your intervention in this thread has accomplished  
quite the opposite. It is less clear to me now, after your  
intervention, what policies you think you're enforcing or what you  
think your role is here than before you intervened.

The WG certainly has disagreements over these issues (again these are  
issues that just didn't get transferred from the old issue-tracking  
system to the new issue-tracking system). However, that is not unique  
to these issues. We have disagreements over all of the issues. If  
there was immediate consensus on a topic it couldn't ever become an  
issue, let alone being added to the issue-tracking system. If you  
really want to change the way issues get added to the issue-tracking  
system, I think you should take a step back from these immediate  
issues and think abstractly about what criteria you'd like to see  
applied. Propose those principles to the WG and I'm sure we can come  
to an understanding.

Take care,
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2008 02:09:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:30 UTC