W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > January 2010

Re: HTML WG F2F meeting

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:32:11 +0000 (UTC)
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: www-archive Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001270954440.22020@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> I'll comment on the f2f later (thoughts both pro and con), but let me 
> talk about telecons. I think there's only three really important 
> functions that WG Chairs serve:
> 
> (a) Interface with the W3C Team for needed bureaucratic processes (such 
> as publication and transition requests).

Isn't that the staff contact's job?


> (b) Make sure that the Working Group is a productive environment and 
> makes forward progress.
>
> (c) Make sure Working Group members are informed about within the 
> Working Group and relevant information from outside the Working Group.
> 
> [...] Some people have a hard time following the list. Telecons are one 
> of the traditional ways to communicate, and seem to help 15-30 people 
> every week get better informed.

If that's what the telecon is for, then that's what it should be described 
as, not as a "weekly working group teleconference". I wouldn't have any 
objection to the chairs conducting a "weekly status report", if it was 
clearly positioned as such. Currently, however, it is positioned the same 
way as telecons in other WGs, and as such is going to give the impression 
that the meeting is expected to have decisions.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 10:32:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:45 UTC