confidentiality in W3C WGs

[Tim Bray]

At 12:49 PM 9/13/99 +0200, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
>The more this thread continues, the more I'm getting convinced there's
>something wrong with the W3C. Obviously there is a reason why proper process
>documentation is not being provided. 

Well, there is http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/

which is a public document.  

And I can't find the documentation just now, but I know (as co-editor
of multiple W3C specs) that we are required to produce a written 
"disposition of comments" on all public (not w3c, public) comments sent
to the address on the published WDs and PRs.  And there are lots of them.
And sometimes they're good comments that change the draft. 

Not that I'm saying W3C process is perfect.  Nor that this debate
isn't useful. -Tim


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)