- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:52:17 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Web Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > Hi Sam, > > On Nov 9, 2009, at 4:25 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:05:44 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> >>> wrote: >>>> Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>>>> -public-html >>>>> +www-archive >>>>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:52:29 -0800, Sam Ruby >>>>> <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>>>>> So, on one hand, I have zero sympathy for any active participant >>>>>> in the working group who chose to attend a session on MathML who >>>>>> may claim to have been unaware of this work or making any >>>>>> statement other than the fact that while they personally did not >>>>>> have a chance to review it, sufficient others have for this to >>>>>> have been sent on behalf of the working group. >>>>> >>>>> When the session was announced I got the impression it was about >>>>> MathML integration (also based on a short discussion earlier with >>>>> another Math WG member) and since I know something about that I >>>>> attended. I had no idea MathML feedback would be discussed. >>>> >>>> Did I suggest that you shouldn't have attended? >>> I do not think the "zero sympathy" is fair given the situation. >> >> Whee! This is fun. Not. >> >> Let's start at the beginning. Did you or did you not miss the >> repeated and public statements that there would be a review going on, >> statements that were made in October, made on public-html, the low >> traffic public-html-wg-announce, and on the weekly telecon itself and >> more than three weeks before TPAC? I will note that annevk2 was >> listed as a participant in the 15 October call. > > Having been present in person in the HTML/MathML session I can say the > following: > > - A number of people seemed to be aware that there was review going on > and comments being collected. Excellent. > - Some people (including, I believe, Anne) were aware that comment were > circulated and solicited two days before the session in question. Excellent. > - Almost no one seemed to be aware that these comments had been > submitted as official feedback from the HTML WG to the Math WG earlier > that same day. Completely understandable. > - A number of people seemed to feel uncomfortable with being put in the > position of standing behind these comments as comments from the whole WG. There clearly is a labeling issue, one that we seem to have made progress on. > I believe the confusion here was almost entirely the fault of the chairs > for not stating a clear process. Agreed. > I believe it is unfair to seemingly > assign some blame to the attendees of the joint session ("zero > sympathy") for lack of attention, I would agree that that would be unfair, if in fact that was what I said. > when many of them are among the most > active and attentive participants in the working group. If many of those > people were confused about what happened, then that's a clear indication > that the chairs failed to set expectations properly. Similarly, it would > be unfair to in any way blame Shelley for the confusing situation, and I > was careful not to do so in my remarks. Confusion occurred, as stated above, the confusion was not Anne's fault nor Shelley's fault. It was yours, mine, and Paul's. And I can live with that. Despite the confusion, a good result occurred, and we know where we need to improve. We will do better next time. > One thing to keep in mind: typical W3C procedure is that official > cross-WG comments are assumed to have consensus of the Working Group > providing them unless stated otherwise. The chairs should have kept this > in mind when developing the process for cross-WG comments. I for one am > happy that Shelley was willing to beta test the process. Now we need to > fix the bugs. We clearly have a bug or two to fix. And I'm confident that we will fix them. > Regards, > Maciej - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 16:52:59 UTC