Re: TAG Blog Post on Feedback from Extensible Web Summit

On 4/17/14 2:17 PM, ext Domenic Denicola wrote:
> That's good feedback. I think we did a fairly good job communicating through the venues available to us, but what are some venues where you think the communication should have taken place, that we missed?

Regarding "so, how do we get the W3C to update its `events process` to 
include gatherings like this?", there were some related discussions: one 
on a Member list [1] and another on public-w3process [2]. A new 
[EventsProcess] wiki was started to gather some input (e.g. Problem 
Statement, Considerations, Best Practices, Recommendations and such) and 
a few related bugs were filed [3].

If folks want to discuss how the Consortium can update its arcane 
"Workshops and Symposia" process [4] to include events like this Summit, 
I encourage them to participate via public-w3process and/or update 
[EventsProcess] directly. However, don't hold your breath re something 
actually happening RSN since some AB members indicated nothing is likely 
to happen for a "few years" [5].

-Thanks, AB

[EventsProcess] <https://www.w3.org/wiki/EventsProcess>
[1] <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2014JanMar/0142.html>
[2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Apr/0001.html>
[3] <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/products/7>
[4] <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/events.html#GAEvents>
[5] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Apr/0011.html>

Received on Thursday, 17 April 2014 21:33:39 UTC