Thread Subject: Re: TEITAC committee participants - Editing Wiki
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Bailey Bruce
Date: Thu, Oct 12 2006 5:35 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Bailey Bruce: "Re: TEITAC committee participants - Editing Wiki"
- Previous message in thread: Jim Tobias: "Jared's workload (Was: TEITAC committee participants- Editing Wiki)"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
I concur with all Gregg's point but disagree with his conclusion that
having the wiki relatively open is a bad idea, at least at this
juncture. Since there is only one wiki, what if one subcommittee
welcomes all to do the work, but another asserts that only formal
subcommittee members should be editing? I also think the manpower
required to exert this level of control could be put to better effect.
Close administration of privileges and subcommittee membership will be
time consuming, all the more so because the process is suppose to be
open. Who will be doing this work? Jared? Me? Tim? Jim and Mike?
The subcommittee chairs? Is this task even something Jared could
delegate if he wanted to?
I am disinclined to make it a point to save the subcommittee
transcripts. I am actually strongly of the opinion that such a practice
should be actively discouraged. RCC is an accommodation, not a
stenography service. If the chair keeps it long enough to facilitate
the posting of minutes or a summary, that is fine. FACA obligations for
the committee meetings is something else entirely.
- Next message in Thread: Bailey Bruce: "Re: TEITAC committee participants - Editing Wiki"
- Previous message in Thread: Jim Tobias: "Jared's workload (Was: TEITAC committee participants- Editing Wiki)"