- From: Robert Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 19:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
----- "Shelley Powers" <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: > > It would be better to hear from the accessibility folks, but your > change sounds great to me. I am glad that simply stating the truth, without overly prescriptive or snotty text, seems to resolve conflicts. > > Doc procedures: So you duplicate the document, and make your changes. > Do you, then, need to link it within an email to this group so that > people can see the changes? What is the procedure followed to ensure > these documents are given their due consideration? Do we need to > formally submit them? Well, there's a big long process document. I suppose we'll go by that. :) I would like a little leeway in these first days, as I build a fleshed-out document in public (release early, release often). The chairs seem ok with that. Personally, I hope the group will settle into a pattern of approving uncontroversial documents: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/06/27/NoInventions I love innovation, just not here. :) But, frankly, I haven't given much thought to the process details going forward. I'm pretty sure we can do better than a process one might term "Autocratic Decisions Made Based On Secret Feedback, Followed By Condescending Denials Of Autocratic Decision Making, Characterization Of Dissent As 'Force', And Cynical Patent FUD". And, if someone has a better way, they can write a document too. - Rob
Received on Saturday, 4 July 2009 02:40:19 UTC