- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 20:32:39 +0000
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[Matthew Wilcox:] > > One of the things being assumed here is that forums would sit alongside > the list. > > That would never work, they can't have two separate sets of content. My > point wasn't that we should have a forum as well, it was that we should > have a forum instead. > > And then we began discussing the merits of each approach and discovering > what the members need any solution to do in order to work well. > > Here are the options that have emerged from the discussion: > > 1) We ditch lists and go with a forum > > 2) We abandon the forum idea entirely > > 3) We make or patch a forum which maintains all of the functionality of a > list, for those that don't want to use the forum's interface. > > 4) We adapt the HyperMail software that manages the web-viewable archives > to become more forum-like. > > 5) We don't do anything and watch as new blood stops coming in over time > and the place dies out in the same manner that the software it runs on has. If new blood has stopped coming, that is news to me. WG face-to-face meetings are about three times larger than when I joined a few years ago and both the number of participants and volume of activity on this mailing list has gone likewise. So from my end, #5 is an hypothetical unsupported by the evidence. [1] There needs to be a space where implementors, spec editors and other parties interested in in-depth discussions can have a meaningful conversation. That space should be open to all, whether they have something to contribute or want to look in. This space already exists and there is no objective evidence it is "dying out" (far from it). So before deciding on this vs. that I'd like to understand what it is we're trying to fix. So far, most of the argument seems to revolve around a mix of individual preferences for particular software and user experiences + complaints about well-known and acknowledged issues (lousy subscription process, dated archive system). [1] A simple look at our old archive shows the following number of posts for 2011 vs. 2008 2011 2008 January 721 613 February 822 341 March 763 445 April 839 527 May 728 270 June 826 396 July 558 630 August 681 272 September 563 245 October 896 359 November 815 558 December 555 237 Monthly avg. 730 407 For an increase of 79%. The number gets crazier the farther back you go.
Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 20:33:20 UTC