Re: failure to communicate

> Janet Daly wrote:
> > For those of you not familiar with how W3C works: W3C puts documents out
> > for public comment, announces them, and is obliged to respond to
> > questions and critiques. This document was no different; in fact, not
> > only was the document announced on the W3C Homepage six weeks ago, the
> > WG produced both a FAQ and backgrounder, and the announcement was
> > carried on a variety of syndication services which rely on RSS feeds.
> 
> Given that, according to the W3C's own archives at:
> 
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/>
> 
> For the month of August:
> 
>         * 7 messages total were received, of which:
>                 5 were spam;
>                 1 was an announcement of the list's creation;
>                 1 was a comment.
> 
> For the month of September:
> 
>         * 748 messages total were received, of which:
>                 The only messages dated before the 24th were spam;
>                 one comment was dated the 24th;
>                 one comment was dated the 27th;
>                 two comments were dated the 28th;
>                 20 comments were dated the 29th;
>                 the remainder of the comments (well over seven hundred)
>                         were dated the 30th.
> 
> I would suggest that the W3C's strategies for announcing new policies
> come under review, if it truly seeks informed public commentary.
> 
> I feel certain that the W3C will receive the type of critique it desires
> if the comment period is extended.  Such a dramatic groundswell of
> opposition on the very day of the comment period deadline, irrespective
> of how well- or poorly-informed, should indicate to any rational mind a
> failure of initial communication.
> 
> > As of now, many comments sent to W3C's Patent Policy Comment list simply
> > say, "Don't!" By responding in this manner, writers give the Working
> > Group nothing on which to build a constructive response or to consider.
> 
> It is not logical under these circumstances to interpret the long period
> of silence as assent.
> 
> Perhaps after extending the comment period, those with incisive
> comments, both in favor of and against the existing proposal, should be
> recruited to help author a new draft.  I do assume that the W3C seeks to
> be representative of the community it serves.

Hi, Branden.

Please be assured that no one at W3C had interpreted public silence as
assent. In addition, many comments did come in on the member-readable
channel. 

The Patent Policy Working Group stands to benefit greatly from your
detailed responses, and from those from other members of the developer
community. I encourage you to take advantage of the extension [1] for
public comments to provide feedback that may be of use to the Working
Group, and to W3C at large.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/10/patent-response

Best regards,

Janet

--

World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Janet Daly, Head of Communications
MIT/LCS NE43-363
200 Technology Square
Cambridge, MA 02139
USA

voice: +1.617.253.5884
fax:   +1.617.258.5999 
http://www.w3.org/
janet@w3.org

Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 01:13:27 UTC