xml-dev - W3C public lists [was: Realistic proposals to the W3C?]

[Steve Rowe <sarowe@textwise.com>]

Jonathan Marsh gave same-day on-the-record responses to comments
submitted to the www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org list around
the time of issue of the last working draft of XInclude.
His responses were of exactly the type Mr. Bourret suggests
they should be.  High marks to Mr. Marsh for providing the kind
of feedback that's likely to encourage positive external
engagement.  Other W3C public lists, as well as the W3C's image,
could benefit greatly from this kind of commitment.

Steve Rowe
MNIS-TextWise Labs

> Ronald Bourret wrote:
> > Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com wrote:
> > Given that there's no way the W3C is going to make the 
> > detailed votes on specific proposals available to the public
> > (sorry, it ain't gonna happen, so don't bother flaming me),
> > what could it do to maximize the benefits of "sunshine"
> > without drying up the information flow? 
> 
> I can't speak for others here, but I sometimes feel like 
> contributing to the public mailing lists is like walking past
> somebody in the hallway, saying, "Hi", and having them just
> keep walking. After a while, you begin to wonder if they know
> you exist.
> 
> As Matthew Gertner pointed out, there is a real PR issue 
> here. Even if the WG addresses all points on the public
> mailing list, the people who submit comments aren't likely to
> feel like their comments are worthwhile without an actual
> reply -- just seeing that your change made it into the
> next draft isn't enough, as you have no idea if you've had 
> any effect or the change came from someone else.
>
> Although it's not always the case, I'd often be satisfied
> with a list of quick, point-by-point answers:
>
> "Good point. We'll take it up."
> "We've done it -- it'll be in the next draft."
> "Sorry, we've considered that and voted against it -- here's
> why..."