Hey, WebApps Fans-
I'd like to take a step back here for a moment.
I do understand that people are frustrated with the untimely response by
Microsoft; it has indeed been a long time coming, and further delay is
inevitably going to raise blood pressure.
But I think that more important than the particular technical issue at
stake is the preservation of a positive and productive tone in WebApps
WG communications, including this list. I'm concerned about this group
getting off to a bad start, and impairing its functionality.
I think that this will require two things:
1) a more temperate tone in emails, with a minimum of hyperbole,
politics, exaggeration, polemic, and combative language;
2) a genuine commitment to honoring our commitments, such as promptly
providing feedback and closing out our actions, so that frustrations
don't build up and boil over; we are all busy, but we all know that if
this WG is going to accomplish its goals, we need to recognize that
anytime we put ourselves in the critical path for a task, not acting
promptly will result in considerable inconvenience for a large number of
people, or in a loss of our own credibility (in which case our feedback
or actions may not be effective).
I suggest that we all take this transition to a new WebApps WG as a
chance to turn over a new leaf... to clear the slate of our
frustrations, and to adopt a friendlier atmosphere, and to reaffirm our
individual commitments to helping this group meet its deliverables. For
my part, I owe this group some serious attention on the Element
Traversal spec and on DOM3 Events; now that WebApps is chartered and I
don't have to spend time on that anymore, I will be more actively
working on moving those specs forward.
I trust the chairs to help preserve the peace by enforcing a civil tone
and by holding people accountable for their responsibilities, and I
don't want to step on their toes. But I do hope that the participants
in this group will consider this.
Best Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, WebApps, SVG, and CDF
Michael(tm) Smith wrote (on 6/13/08 7:53 PM):
Sunava Dutta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2008-06-13 14:36 -0700:
[Sunava Dutta] We're kind of heads down in our development cycle
with IE8 and the F2F is the first opportunity to discuss this at
length. Personally, I have other urgent pending standards
related items in HTML 5.0 and Web Apps that I'll be having to
attend to.
I don't find that acceptable. Everyone in the group has been
waiting for your long-delayed detailed comments with the
expectation that they would read them, evaluate them, and then
respond to them in the same way that they read and respond to any
other comments posted to the discussion.
You've yet to actually even deliver the comments to the group in
a way that makes it possible for members of the group to even read
them at all. You've missed the deadline you agreed to initially
(June 6) and also have missed the adjusted date you committed to
providing them (Tuesday or Wednesday this week at the latest).
When you do finally provide them to the group in the way that
you've been asked to (that is, without requiring members to agree
to a license in order just to read them, and in plain text or HTML
or short of that, as a PDF attachment), just dropping the comments
on the group and then saying that you have no plans to discuss
them at length during the next two weeks is not going to work.
--Mike
