[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Web Philosophy
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 23:50:27 +0200
> I've heard this one over and over and, let's face it, being an "invited
> expert" is not a realistic option for most general members of the
> public. It assumes that you:
> (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.
> 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.
What kind of participation would you prefer instead? Invited experts,
first of all, should be experts. *That* alone cuts out most of the
world. Then, they should be interested in participation. For
face-to-face meetings, there is little you can except for flying to
the place where meeting happens. So you would prefer if no physical
meetings were held? As for a), do you know any expert who is willing
to participate in physical meetings but did not get invited?