W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-coremob@w3.org > March 2012

RE: Charter amendment proposal

From: Gholkar, Vidhya, VF-Group <Vidhya.Gholkar@vodafone.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 19:04:08 +0000
To: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>, Core Mobile Web Platform CG <public-coremob@w3.org>
CC: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Message-ID: <59D61334DEE3624CBCE18016720E0534017953@VOEXM02W.internal.vodafone.com>
Hi ,

For further clarity please would the Chairs consider the following:

a) remove "Otherwise"  [reads like a "Else" statement and it is not  clear what the "Else" is referring to] and replace with "Where tests 
don't exist ..."  (or something similar).
b) There is a confusing statement about "contributing back to the original group". Q: Shouldn't the charter just focus on what this group  does and not place (implied) obligations on what contributors do outside the group?



-----Original Message-----
From: Tobie Langel [mailto:tobie@fb.com] 
Sent: 06 March 2012 06:53
To: Core Mobile Web Platform CG
Cc: Robin Berjon
Subject: Charter amendment proposal


Following up on charter comments last week, here's the promised breakdown.

The two main comments that we've received to date about the charter are questions on the group's concrete processes and clarification requests around testing.

The former is mostly a question about the what versus the how. We went back and forth with this when drafting the charter and ended up deciding it was easier to concentrate on writing out aspirational goals in the charter and having another document that would describe how we're going to go about achieving those. This document is coming shortly.

Concerning the tests, one of the goals of this CG is to accelerate interoperability and testing is a great way to do that. Conversely, duplication is a great way to prevent that and will be avoided at all cost. As described in the charter, tests that have a logical home will be contributed to it directly by the test's author. The charter's wording is confusing and we suggest amendments here:
.. Quality of implementation tests are needed and the CG is a great venue for those.

Finally and although that goes without saying, the charter does not currently indicate chairs have to respect consensus. We're also slightly amending the charter's last paragraph to fix that. Again see the proposed amendments..

We'd like to get charter issues behind us as fast as possible. In keeping with that, please consider this a CfC with a one week deadline. Please limit your comments to strictly substantive issues and keep in mind the mantra of productive groups: "I can live with it."


Robin & Tobie
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 19:07:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:44 UTC