- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 16:28:53 -0600
- To: "'Michael Brennan'" <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>, www-tag@w3.org
The problem with an issue number or restricting mail to the next agenda is that again, one can't ask a new question. One can always preface it with the right subject. I would have been content to read the archives because yetAnotherSubscription is not a high priority regardless of the cast. A moderator usually works well for lists of reasonable people. Back to the lurk. len -----Original Message----- From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com] > From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] <snip/> > So, we solicit input on how to handle this. Here are some > options: > > - Become ruthless and enforce a rule that all postings must > contain an issue number in the subject line or have a > subject line that says "New Issue Proposal for TAG" > - Try to restrict discussion to those issues that the TAG > plans to discuss at its next meeting - we'd have to publish > our agendas well in advance, but we think we can do that. > This model worked pretty well in the old XML IG. > - Drastically restrict posting rights to www-tag; either > to TAG members or to Invited Experts or by some other > criterion. I've been quietly lurking so as not to add to the noise level. I'd lean heavily toward #1. I'd be comfortable with #2 as a compromise so long as there is a mechanism for people to raise new issues, and not be solely restricted to those the TAG has decided in advance are up for discussion. I'd be very discouraged to see #3 adopted without giving #1 (or #2) a chance with admonishments to people to comply.
Received on Monday, 1 April 2002 17:29:24 UTC