RE: Web Philosophy

[Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>]

Ronald Bourret says:
> (a) are well enough known to get invited,
> (b) have enough time to contribute at the level of a WG member,
> (c) have enough money to attend (flight, hotel, etc.) the WG meetings.
> 
> (a) cuts out most of the world and (b) and (c) cut out most of the
> remaining people.

If you don't qualify for (a) then frankly, you probably wouldn't
be much use to a WG anyway.

If you don't have time to dedicate (point (b)) you are also going
to end up wasting other peoples time, and be useless in a WG.

Finally, point (c), given suitable levels of (a) and (b) is rarely
a problem... people will work around logistic issues if you have 
proven valuable enough.

Even for someone sponsored by a W3C member, WG participation requires
a *lot* of time, a *lot* of knowledge, and a *lot* of perseverence.
If you don't have these you will not contribute significantly to 
the WG.

You're right, most people don't have the expertise, dedication, or
resources to participate. I am personally thankful for that... 

> I'm not saying anything about whether the W3C is open or closed 
> -- just that I'm tired of hearing the "invited expert" argument 
> as a reasonable route to allow non-W3C members to participate.

My retort is that if you have proven value, this is a perfectly
viable option.