Lists Home |
Date Index |
Also sprach John Cowan:
> On the [censored] W3C-internal mailing list, to which I belong, the
> question of open access was brought up -- and shot down on the
> to-me unbelievably feeble ground that certain members were afraid of
> spam if their addresses were openly published! (The W3C archiving
> mechanism for both public and internal mailing lists does not allow
> obfuscated addresses.)
> IMHO if you are going to set policy or create mechanism for a fundamental
> part of the Web, you should be willing to stand up and say so, and
> maybe run a spam-filter. Ghu knows the public-comment mailing lists
> collect enough spam as it is.
I have the suspicion that spam anxiety does not explain it all.
Specifically, some messages on public W3C mailing lists contain URLs
pointing at (or was it "denoting" ?) member-only "administrative" documents.
Too much openness could turn out to be embarrassing to some participating
companies, I guess.
Luckily, we can enjoy for free some little gems such as IRC teleconference
logs - they are great fun sometimes. E.g. the beginning of
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/03/28-minutes hints at what the poor
members have to suffer through in order to get the job done:
hugo has changed the topic to: WSAWG telcon
Zakim, this is WS_ArchWG
Zakim, who is here?
I see ??P0, ??P1, ??P2
zakim, Chris? is definitely me
zakim, definitely_me is me
just in case
IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2002/03/28-ws-arch-irc (HTML, text and RDF
zakim, what's the agenda
I don't understand 'what's the agenda', chris. Try /msg Zakim help
No wonder it takes awhile to turn the XML spaghetti into a more modular and
layered (lasagne-ish ?) set of specs.