<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
On 03/20/2009 03:31 AM, SitG Admin:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:f06110406c5e8a0a4efe3@%5B192.168.0.2%5D"
type="cite">Does this mean that they shouldn't be permitted *outside*
the WG?
<br>
<br>
We're not much of a transparent community if we tell those who want to
openly discuss something that, no, that's a restricted topic . . .
"restricted" in that the OIDF has approved it as something to be worked
on (!!) . . . they'll have to join the WG, which by the way means
signing something, making the appropriate commitments, and meeting some
preconditions.
<br>
<br>
If those who *are* outside the WG want to forward something from
outside it to those inside, I'm fine with that (and this may be the
best way of compromising between excluding those who can't join a WG
and not missing out on their input), but let's not make "contributing
to the community" a privilege.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
...and the main point I was trying to make was, that voting in favor of
the WG also means that those issues will most likely have to be
addressed. At least that's what I expect to happen...<br>
<br>
...besides that feel free to discuss anything, everywhere,
anytime...I'm all with you ;-)<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">Regards </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Signer: </td>
<td>Eddy Nigg, <a href="http://www.startcom.org">StartCom Ltd.</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Jabber: </td>
<td><a href="xmpp:startcom@startcom.org">startcom@startcom.org</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blog: </td>
<td><a href="http://blog.startcom.org">Join the Revolution!</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Phone: </td>
<td>+1.213.341.0390</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>