W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2012

W3C Web Philosophy Community Group

From: Adam Sobieski <adamsobieski@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 16:47:19 +0000
Message-ID: <SNT002-W126995B9816F10E4F46131DC53D0@phx.gbl>
To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
W3C Technical Architecture Group,

Greetings.  There was recently an invitation and opportunity to review the Web Philosophy Community Group and I would like to report my findings to the W3C Technical Architecture Group.

Firstly, some premises of the Web Philosophy Community Group's mission statement (http://www.w3.org/community/philoweb/) are problematic, that scientists and technologists would desire to have, instead of in their work groups, a separate forum and separate group for discussions about philosophical topics.

The Web Philosophy Community Group's mission statement appears to be written in a persuasive tone, describing services provided by the group, the outsourcing of philosophical research, analysis, discussion, and reasoning, discussions described as of a "long-term" nature about "minutiae".  Their mission statement resembles a sales pitch for what are phrased as services that the group seeks to provide for scientists and technologists at the W3C, describing burdens that the group seeks to take upon themselves for other W3C participants.  Their sales pitch includes a quote from Tim Berners-Lee, almost implying that the premises of their group are resonant with his personal philosophy or implying his support for or agreement with the premises their group.

After review of the Web Philosophy Community Group, where a number of interpersonal, sociological, rhetorical, and public speaking techniques were observed and cataloged (some of which warranted a request for a public apology), a counterproposal is indicated in this report which is posited to be more respectful of the scientists and technologists, men and women who participate and contribute at the W3C.

Proposed is a suffixed mailing list available for each Working Group, as convenient to each Working Group, for example public-html-philosophy@w3.org or math-philosophy@w3.org .  It is posited that scientists and technologists in a multi-stakeholder model can participate in their own philosophical discussions about topics pertaining to their expertise, making use of tools as convenient to them, making use of publications as convenient to them, while discussing topics with their colleagues as convenient to them.

Kind regards,

Adam Sobieski 		 	   		  
Received on Sunday, 30 December 2012 16:47:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:18 UTC