- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:10:59 -0400
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Shelley Powers wrote: > > I may be wrong: chairs, does the W3C have a usability lab? I don't know. W3C team contacts: does the W3C have a usability lab? >>> I realize this is a discussion we've had in the past. I copied this >>> email to www-archive. I believe we should continue this particular >>> discussion in that location. >> I don't see why we should exclude the rest of the group from discussions >> about how to go about obtaining more useful results. > > I'm cool with this, but I'm just a little wary -- I no longer can tell > when a discussion should take place here, or in www-archives. I'm > becoming uncomfortable participating in either place because of the > seemingly (to me) arbitrary nature of when a discussion is allowed > here, and when pushed to www-archives. > > But if folks are cool with this discussion happening here, I'm happy > to continue here. From time to time, it makes sense to repeat a discussion, particularly if there is somebody new who needs to be brought up to speed. If all such discussions happen on public_html, the volume makes it hard for people who are fully aware of the previous discussion to keep up. That being said, sometimes it is hard to tell (in advance) as to whether a given discussion is breaking new ground or not. That's not a big problem as the discussion is still archived (hence the name) and any salient results can be pointed to on public-html. One thing is true: moving a discussion to www-archive doesn't provide the benefit of reducing traffic on public-html if public-html continues to be copied. - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 18:11:47 UTC