IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Locus of API discussion

cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Fri, 19 July 2013 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB2811E8137 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.941
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.342, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eSf0ekyE4g3i for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com (mail-qa0-f47.google.com [209.85.216.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570B111E812C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id i13so4230793qae.20 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=TCTwFH9C+L/gMpRRgvOesN0ULkSTssA12cFxgYRinFY=; b=ReR8ifjtjrqJEA9FcOguvjNwUtRTMtq3AKcgLNbcMJdydVodjHLEaWyff9U1NaH2d1 Rur3JX7AVtxYtGFRz2jtApvrSnHel19nDhixP0PvEAW5IueyiZ3WS/rFjIbBJwG+knsG D+T79JBwSJA1BG69W8qMRwXRsY+xJGtU5bY8dodUXG/kflvHReXwsY1sh1telvhOt3eW CLwkSw681b7LpR6VKEVoVAzN5gIrxIqsrktcHxiGMe4xr5d+xMPP4pQOt6iUf9d8hfH6 eyxwvljO8wUG2bFFWXCfRNjm4UhZSoBitMAkRTILkDeOtvDhfxjJ3CibaCC/63aLLViA pXbg==
X-Received: by 10.224.53.136 with SMTP id m8mr8900863qag.63.1374249266690; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y4sm23361304qai.5.2013.07.19.08.54.25 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 08:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51E96123.5070301@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:54:11 -0400
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
References: <CA+9kkMAaaT5RRLUrGvzs0zB0jXRQdHLm5HJH5-VkT5p1ZetVPQ@mail.gmail.com> <51DC3644.4020107@bbs.darktech.org> <CABcZeBPC2FUZ+oCSNVHwAqzrSar=wTqz0AGZ6YqpoOfJjy0qSg@mail.gmail.com> <51DC8445.2030902@bbs.darktech.org> <E597FDC9-9E24-4598-B62A-4067847ABF7A@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <E597FDC9-9E24-4598-B62A-4067847ABF7A@iii.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk4gWir/dG5N5Z6iBEooTe5ULV30jSwwdxKFqX45+PULL9rRjy5XiQxqt7gk7DB+IJPB3/w
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Locus of API discussion
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:54:33 -0000

On 19/07/2013 10:24 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2013, at 2:44 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>
>>     Three weeks ago I posted a summary of discussion points that came up in the WebRTC World conference (most of which had to do with the WebRTC API). To date, I have not received a reply from any of the people you have listed. I am unable to gather the necessary momentum to turn these points into action items without your help. I was/am frustrated that the spec editors and vendors are responsible to engage the community on these matters, but did not. I hope this clarifies what I meant.
> Many of us have been very busy updating drafts for ietf deadline so it as been a hard time to respond.
Hi Cullen,

     Welcome back :)

     That's understandable but next time might I suggest you reply 
immediately with: "You bring up good points but I am busy updating 
drafts for the ietf deadline. I'll reply as soon as I get this done..." 
At least then there is an acknowledgement that my points are being taken 
into consideration and an expectation that a response will arrive in the 
near future. The current process is very broken. We have a lot of 
discussions on the mailing list without any concrete action items. When 
a discussion thread goes unanswered, there is no follow-up. On the one 
hand, most organizations don't conduct such long discussions over a bug 
tracker but on the other hand a bug tracker provides the assurance that 
an issue will remain open until it is resolved to everyone's mutual 
satisfaction. Issues don't close silently as happens on mailing lists. 
We need to find a way to fix our process.

     Another thing I don't understand: As far as I know, the Working 
Group consists of 
http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=47318&public=1&order=org. 
That's around 78 people, yet none of them followed up on this. Where is 
the list of Working Group members that have an obligation to follow-up 
on these kind of posts? Meaning, who could I reasonably expect to reply?

Thanks,
Gili

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email