Hi Phil, Good question. I’m afraid none of the username/passwords I have for w3.org seem to work. Can you give me a hint at which pair I should be using, or tell me how to retrieve/reset, please?
While I’m here… :-) a) I think the idea of allowing CFPs, as long as they clearly have [CFP] or whatever in the subject line, is great. b) We could pick one of the two lists, then we would see less duplication; I would suggest semweb, as that embraces LD. (Maybe I would get to vote that way, but I don’t know what the 4 questions are :-) ) c) I don’t want to have CFPs shortened - I often read my email when I am offline (in fact I keep such emails to read offline), and it is a pain when the information is all “just a click away”, but I can’t get it. Best Hugh > On 30 Mar 2016, at 12:21, Phil Archer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > > A perennial topic at W3C is whether we should allow calls for papers to be > posted to our mailing lists. Many argue, passionately, that we should not > allow any CfPs on any lists. It is now likely that this will be the policy, > with any message detected as being a CfP marked as spam (and therefore > blocked). > > Historically, the semantic-web and public-lod lists have been used for CfPs > and we are happy for this to continue *iff* you want it. > > Last time we asked, the consensus was that CfPs were seen as useful, but it's > time to ask you again. > > Please take a minute to answer the 4 question, no need for free text, survey > at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/1/ > > Thanks > > Phil. > > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1 >
