On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Christine Perey wrote:
Hi Harry,
Three topics
Re: Openness
1. the wiki page with the charter, the list and the telecon are open to all.
As you say, all the topics have been discussed by a few of us on the list.
Unless I'm mistaken, these are the places where transparency and open
process happens. Anyone can visit the charter and comment about it on the
list. If a person cannot participate in the telecon, as suggested somewhere,
a person should send a representative/delegate.
That is impossible for many people. The general trend with the W3C is to
move activity to wikis and public-lists, and when there are disagreements
where consensus can not be reached, to vote. Given the low activity on the
list in general (most activity is myself, you, and Tim) I suggest a
questionnaire is useful.
2. We have made an effort, by scheduling this telecon at an inconvenient
hour for 80% of those who will participate (based in Western Europe), in
order to ensure that anyone wishing to join from other geographies can join.
Are some of the DiSO people you know going to join?
That's a good idea. I will invite them, although their joining is doubtful
I would imagine.
Re: the survey
1. How is the survey process different than asking everyone who has a strong
opinion to express it on the list within 48 hours of the conference call?
You could post to the list today asking if anyone with opinions on agenda
topics such as merging the task forces (or other) and recommending that, as
laid out on the teleconference page, they express them in writing to the
list within at least 48 hours (21:00 GMT 2 March 2009).
I think what Renato and Tim are suggesting is that you can kick off that
process yourself by expressing your opinions on each of the items in the
agenda (see teleconf page) to the list. If other discussion points you feel
need to be raised are not on the agenda, please recommend via the list that
they be added.
2. I went to this page to view the most recent edition of the questionnaire:
<http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/99999/SocialWebXGCharter/>
I have not found any of the changes suggested by myself and others have been
implemented in the survey. If the survey were being modified in response to
the recommendations, we might make progress and revisit the subject.
Otherwise, it is clear that (as it stands at the moment on morning of Thurs
Feb 26) it is unlikely to help more than hurt this difficult process.
I am working on this.
Re: XG chairs
There may be another error not previously pointed out about the survey. I
noticed that on the survey in first draft (not public) you have placed my
name on the list of possible XG co-chairs.
I did not nominate myself on the Social Unified XG Charter (public) page.
Are you nominating me for that esteemed position? ;-)
Apologies! If you wish to nominate yourself, now is the time. Otherwise I
will remove your nomination.
Christine
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Halpin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 2:30 AM
To: Renato Iannella
Cc: Tim Anglade; Krishna Sankar (ksankar); Fabien Gandon; Karl Dubost; Mauro
Nunez; Ann Bassetti; Dominique Hazael-Massieux; Miquel Martin; Christine
Perey
Subject: Re: Survey of list on the Unified Social XG Charter (Feedback
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Renato Iannella wrote:
On 24 Feb 2009, at 20:24, Tim Anglade wrote:
My feedback on the draft survey.
At this point, I suggest we drop the Survey, ask Participants to think
clearly about the current Charter, and make concrete proposals at the
teleconference.
I strongly am against dropping the survey. First, we a small minority of
possibly active people will be on the teleconference. Looking at the wiki, I
only see eight people. That is very small.
The survey will allow people who cannot make the telecon to have their
opinions known and taken into consideration. Also, every question on the
survey has already been suggested on the list-serv, this just allows us to
collate answers easily as well as I get a decent idea of how many people are
actually participating.
The general trend at the W3C is away from making decisions at face-to-face
meetings and even telecons and towards doing most of the work and even
decisions on public list-servs. This is a proper and correct response to
criticisms of the W3C of lack of transparency. Remember, we're doing
*open* standards work.
Cheers... Renato Iannella
NICTA
--
--harry
Harry Halpin
Informatics, University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin
