mailing-lists-proposals

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search
m (roerc4tmona)
m (Reverted edits by TacatRocro (Talk) to last version by DerrickPallas)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
coacelletoge
 
=Mailing Lists Proposals=
=Mailing Lists Proposals=
Line 30: Line 29:
* -1 Joe Andrieu
* -1 Joe Andrieu
* -1 Bob Jonkman (research is part of process, best documented on the Wiki)
* -1 Bob Jonkman (research is part of process, best documented on the Wiki)
-
* -1 Ben Ward (strikes me as dilution too far of µf-discuss and µf-new)
+
* -1 Ben Ward (strikes me as dilution too far of µf-discuss and µf-new)
* 0 Lachlan Hunt
* 0 Lachlan Hunt
Line 62: Line 61:
* -1 Andy Mabbett
* -1 Andy Mabbett
* -1 Bob Jonkman
* -1 Bob Jonkman
-
* -1 Ben Ward (If µf-new or similar is created for active spec'ing and format development, uf-discuss would comfortably accomodate this as part of the course of discussion)
+
* -1 Ben Ward (If µf-new or similar is created for active spec'ing and format development, uf-discuss would comfortably accomodate this as part of the course of discussion)
==microformats-work==
==microformats-work==
Line 73: Line 72:
* +1 Lachlan Hunt
* +1 Lachlan Hunt
* -1 Tantek: "working group" means something quite specific in W3C terminology.  Very little of that applies to the set of people that work on creating new microformats.
* -1 Tantek: "working group" means something quite specific in W3C terminology.  Very little of that applies to the set of people that work on creating new microformats.
-
* -1 BenWard: As Tantek says, ‘working group’ means something that Microformats doesn't have and doesn't want. What's more, to an observer ‘Working Group’ implies exclusivity which isn't what µf development is about.
+
* -1 BenWard: As Tantek says, ‘working group’ means something that Microformats doesn't have and doesn't want. What's more, to an observer ‘Working Group’ implies exclusivity which isn't what µf development is about.
==microformats-tf==
==microformats-tf==

Revision as of 07:31, 7 January 2009

Contents

Mailing Lists Proposals

There is a proposal for creating a new mailing list for discussing the research and creation of new microformats so that those discussions do not overwhelm microformats-discuss.

Some candidates for names with the thinking behind them. Feel free to add your name and opinion (+/- 1 or 0).

microformats-new

Focusing on discussing "new" microformats

microformats-research

Focusing on the essential, and often overlooked by first-time proposers "research" phase(s) in the process

microformats-process

That's really what we're talking about with research of new microformats, isn't it?

microformats-propose

microformats-suggest

Similar to propose but milder ;)

microformats-work

For working on microformats, new and old.

microformats-wg

WG is an abbreviation of Working Group

microformats-tf

TF is an abbreviation of Task Force

microformats-meta

General-purpose "meta-discussion" about microformats.org process and policies

Change nothing

e.g fix uf-dev (we have done that), do nothing else (for now)

General Comments

Andy Mabbett

Why not create a new mailing list for each proposal, once it's reached a certain stage? Then , if the uF is created, or the proposal abandoned, the specific list would be closed, and the archive retained as a link from the "brainstorming" page, as a permanent, and discrete record of discussion on that topic.

Alternatively, the list could be retained for discussion of the implementation and development of that specific uF.

For example, several academic and professional taxonomists have told me in e-mail that they would be interested in the species proposal, (and one astronomer, likewise, for mars/ luna), but do not have the time to follow a general mailing list; indeed, a couple asked me specifically if I would set up a separate mailing list for the subject.

Andy Mabbett 04:44, 24 Oct 2006 (PDT)

mailing-lists-proposals was last modified: Wednesday, December 31st, 1969

Views