- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:38:53 -0600
- To: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
- Cc: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>, "public-council@w3.org" <public-council@w3.org>
On 4 Jan 2013, at 1:28 PM, Young, Milan wrote: [snip] >> Hi Milan, >> >> Maybe a useful way to make progress on this question is to analyze the >> difference between a CG and a WG. >> >> I'm not so much interested in the explicit differences like "the Director chooses >> a WG Chair; the CG chooses its Chair" . >> >> There's another difference that's explicit: W3C requires WGs to follow a >> consensus process; we merely recommend that CGs do. >> >> You wrote: "all communication outside the operational agreement is non- >> binding." What would you contrast that statement with in the W3C process for >> Working Groups? > > [Milan] I don't know the WG process well enough to answer that question. What are your ideas? I was simply looking at your statement and wondering whether you thought it held true in WGs as well. Ian -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 4 January 2013 23:38:57 UTC