- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:26:07 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, www-archive Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Julian Reschke wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > ... > > 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. > > No, it's clearly not positioned that way -- everytime this topic comes > up it is clarified that decisions aren't made during the telco. The fact that the topic comes up at all is the evidence of the positioning. It wouldn't come up if we just called it a status report rather than a teleconference. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 11:26:36 UTC