Re: W3C communities and its modus operandi

Karl Dubost wrote:
> Hi Bijan,
> Le 25 févr. 2009 à 08:02, Bijan Parsia a écrit :
>>  It doesn't seem to me that the W3C has an Audit Board which tries to 
>> analyze failures and draw lessons from them. That could be a very 
>> helpful thing.
> Disclaimer: I have been working at W3C, as an employee,  from 2000 to 2008.
> The W3C doesn't have an audit board, because it has its full community: 
> The public, the members and the staff. And seriously, the Process 
> document and work practices have evolved depending on the pushes of the 
> community as large. The W3C is in perpetual evolution and that is 
> healthy and it learns from its mistakes.
> I don't claim, it is perfect, but the claim above seems completely 
> unjustified.

This exchange puzzles me.

Both of you appear to agree that mistakes are made from time to time, 
and that learning from them and evolving is a good thing.

Perhaps the issue is that Bijan suggested an Audit Board with a capital 
"A" and a capital "B"?  OK, perhaps that's unnecessary.  Meanwhile, I've 
yet to see anybody claim that sXBL was a success.  Have we learned 
everything we can learn from that experience?

Ian has described that experience in a way that I will characterize as a 
death of a thousand cuts, and uses that to justify his swinging a 
pendulum to a place that some may consider a bit too far the other way.

I personally don't want to relive sXBL, either directly by reliving the 
experience or vicariously by participating in a postmortem.  I merely 
want to find the right balance for this working group.

- Sam Ruby

Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 13:56:14 UTC