[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
liam@w3.org (Liam Quin) writes:
>What sort of venue did you have in mind?
Probably something associated with a conference. XML 2003 is probably
too soon, XML Europe might be okay, and Extreme might be very
appropriate given who tends to care about these things.
>Also note that the level of "concealment" of W3C events varies between
>entirely open and entirely member-only, as appropriate.
>
>(if you are thinking of the Worshop I chaired last month, the minutes
>and full proceedings, all that I have, will be public at the end of
>October; most of the delay is to let attendees review the minutes,
>and some of it is so I can get all the papers & presentations linked
>and checked and (where necessary) converted. But it's not a desire
>to be secretive. Participation was limited because smaller Workshops
>can work better, it's a balance between representing the community and
>having a manageable size. But there were quite a few people from
>organizations who were not W3C Members, it was open to the public.)
If it's not open to the public, I'm not going to touch it with a
hundred-foot pole, desire to be secretive or no. Showing up with
functional code seems like an adequate approach to keep size reasonable.
This isn't rocket science, but it does require more than writing a SAX
filter.
>I suppose we could consider doing something at the same week as the
>W3C Technical Plenary in France next Spring; the advantage would be
>that we might get a number of members of XML Core there, as well as
>people from the MathML and HTML Working Groups, and yet not exclude
>anyone else, except by reason of cost of travel, which is always an
>issue with warm-flesh-and-hot-blood events.
I think it would be wiser to associate it with an event which more than
W3C people have existing cause to attend. France in spring sounds
delightful, but I can't say I'd plan to be there.
Also, in one of its original incarnations, the W3C was supposed to be a
research lab. In practice, they seem to form committees and do
research-by-standardization. I'd like the experimental phase of this to
have some chance of flowering before disappearing into conference calls
and member-only discussion.
(XML Core is not one of the parts of the W3C renowned for its openness,
I'm afraid.)
>But even a two or three day workshop would likely not be enough to
>find any consensus unless there was a lot of preparation beforehand.
I don't think consensus is to be expected at this point. This would
just be showing ideas and seeing which people have similar enough ideas
that perhaps they should work together. After five plus years we
finally have a fair number of people asking questions - that seems like
a good signal that it's time to start experimenting.
|
