- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 06:38:30 -0400
- To: ext Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- CC: Josh Soref <jsoref@blackberry.com>, "public-council@w3.org" <public-council@w3.org>
On 3/12/13 10:23 PM, ext Ian Jacobs wrote: > On 12 Mar 2013, at 4:40 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > >> Hi Josh, All, >> >> Josh - this is really interesting and by interesting I mean "hmmm, I hadn't quite thought of the IG vs. CG issue the way you interpret/portray it". I'm reluctant to say on this Public list how I _personally_ (IANAL proviso applies too) see things (e.g. the disclosure requirements for IG vs. CG) differently, although I would be interested in hearing other Council members' opinions. >> >> BTW, Josh's e-mail below, points to the group type comparison document which I only discovered recently. <http://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/compare/>. Perhaps it would be useful to add something like a "disclosure [obligation]" property and to briefly summarize the obligation/requirement for the various group types. >> >> Some other comments on this table - for the PP row, WG column, what does the "(Recommendation)" mean. If this is a reference to the PP, please add a link. Also, please add a link to "(Disclosure)" in the PP row, IG column. > Art, > > I've updated the table based on your comments. Let me know if that helps. Yes, this is much mo' betta'. Thanks! -AB
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2013 10:38:45 UTC