[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
There
might be something to be said for some high-level W3C committee to look at this,
but it's not something I want to get involved in myself. Too busy doing the
work...
Mike
Kay
In a message dated
12/12/01 11:21:25 GMT Standard Time, michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com writes:
AW:
I would be interested to know, assuming it isn't giving
away state secrets, if W3C Working Groups have a quasi-formal goal for the
Recommendations they produce.
MK:
I
think each group makes its own decisions based on the nature of the material
and the background of the WG members.
Mike Kay
Mike,
Assuming you are still on the XSL WG is there a mechanism for
proposing a more standarised approach to aim for better communication?
It seems to me that if the development of a spec included an explicit
goal which incorporated a definition of the target audience and what the spec
should communicate to them then that could go a significant way to improving
the quality (in terms of success of communication) of some W3C specs.
A WG deliverable would then be measured in terms of communication -
admittedly a more difficult measure to assess than simply producing a document
- which likely would make WG members more aware of the need to communicate
effectively to at least some in "the larger Web community".
Poor
communication only serves to make it difficult for implementors and delay the
arrival of reliable tools and to discourage "the larger Web community" from
attempting to disentangle which I like to think of as the XML Spaghetti. :)
Surely good (i.e. improved) communication is one factor
in leading the Web to its full potential?
Andrew Watt
|
