Some notes on process: F2F & telcon & email

[Don Park]

Tim,

There is no such thing as a perfectly efficient process.  There is always
room for improvement and there are always more than one way to do it.  If
one solution does not work, another should be tried.  That is all I am
trying to do between my whining sessions.  If I stayed quiet, would W3C or
TimBL have come out and answered the questions?  I don't think so.  Even if
suggestions for improvements come packaged in barbs, value of the content
still stands, and if W3C is wise enough to see it, it will benefit from it.
I am not saying my solution will work for W3C; it could be full of holes.  I
am saying W3C should not think it has a perfectly working system.

Based on TimBL's reply, I am more hopeful than before that something good
will come out of all this.  Confidentiality is a problem for the public and
a necessity for W3C.  This is just a problem to be solved in my view, so I
am hacking at it.  Even if a solution can not be found, we would have gained
more understanding.

As I stated in my other recent message, I believe confidentiality can be
reduced without hurting W3C by limiting them to F2F and telephone
conferences which should mainly deal with non-technical conflicts and not to
be used for technical discussions.  I also believe that WG/IG mailing lists
should be replaced with web-based tools and made available to the public.

Best,

Don Park    -   mailto:donpark at docuverse.com
Docuverse   -   http://www.docuverse.com


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)