[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
- To: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 08:14:00 +0100
> > The number one issue for democratization of the WWW is how to accomodate
> > input from members of cultures which are based on discretion, deferring
> > to those you respect even when they are wrong, and politely waiting to
> > be asked for an opinion at an appropriate time.
>
> Curiously, the official W3C process expects all non-members to wait
> till "Proposed Recommendation" or (new) "Candidate Recommendation"
> to express opinions. An "appropriate" moment is already defined.
That's not what the W3C Process Document section on WG deliverable
says:
| In addition to the deliverables specified in the Working Group
| charter, a Working Group will post its intermediate results to the
| public Web site at three-month intervals.
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/activities.html#GroupsWG
In effect, you can witness the discussion happening in some of the
W3C public list archives:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public
(e.g. www-svg)
"Proposed Recommendation" is when W3C has its *membership* to express
their opinion.
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
