On 05/09/2009, at 8:40 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Mark Nottingham wrote:
On 05/09/2009, at 3:11 PM, Ian Hickson <[email protected]> wrote:
FYI, it looks like the configuration for the w3c-policy mailing list
was accidentally changed recently; in particular, the archives are
now
password protected:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/w3c-policy/current/index.html
That was on purpose; that list is for administrative (e. g. call
scheduling) and sensitive (e. g. W3c member-confidental) issues.
Oh, that's disappointing. The list was used for much more than just
administrative issues. It's unfortunate to see the IETF and W3C take
steps
backwards in terms of transparency.
I just had another look, and almost everything in the last year is
about timing and agendas for calls, preliminary minutes, etc. "Much
more" is a gross overstatement.
It also isn't a "step backwards"; this list being private pre-dates my
involvement in the liaison (and if you have read the archives, this
was stated a few times quite explicitly, e.g., in 2/2005); the archive
being made available was, as best as I can tell, an oversight by the
Secretariat when it was handed over a little while back.
All of that said, I'll send a message to the list reminding people of
its scope, so that they use the appropriate forum.
The public list (used for all other matters) is public-ietf-
[email protected].
That list hasn't seen any traffic since July, indeed it's only had
thirteen e-mails in the last five months, and only two of those were
from
W3C staff. I think it would be a stretch to say that that list is
used for
any matters, let alone "all other" matters.
And indeed the w3c-policy list hasn't seen any traffic since June, and
only 24 messages since April -- almost all about scheduling
teleconferences.
This is an excellent illustration that there is indeed more work to be
done in the liaison, and that we need tighter coordination and indeed
more discussion. It doesn't, however, explain how having www-policy's
archives open will in any way improve the situation.
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
