W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > September 2013

RE: CfC: to publish a “Encrypted Media Exstensions" hearbeat Working Draft

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:55:18 +0000
To: John Sullivan <johns@fsf.org>
CC: "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
Message-ID: <179e288533204e3799a06fe19fd5fddf@BLUPR03MB246.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
> What is the goal of this draft, and what sorts of issues are we looking for before accepting it as a good update to pass on?

The goal of a heartbeat draft is to demonstrate to the public that the Task Force or WG is making progress on the specification:

	There are several reasons for this Working Group "heartbeat" requirement:
		•To promote public accountability;
		•To encourage Working Groups to keep moving forward, and to incorporate their decisions into readable public documents. 
			People cannot be expected to read several months of a group's mailing list archive to understand where the group stands;
		•To notify interested parties of updated work in familiar a place such as the W3C home page and index of technical reports. 

One possible objection to this CfC would be if one of the Editors implemented something in the draft that did not agreed with the decisions of the Task Force (in this case).  Another might be if the document was malformed from a structural point of view ie previously included material was mistakedly dropped.

It is not appropriate to object to the publication of a heartbeat just because you disagree with how a particular bug or issue has been resolved.  That sort of objection should be filed by re-opening the appropriate bug and by providing your rationale and suggested changes.

/paulc

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329

-----Original Message-----
From: John Sullivan [mailto:johns@fsf.org] 
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 3:10 PM
To: Paul Cotton
Cc: public-html-media@w3.org
Subject: Re: CfC: to publish a “Encrypted Media Exstensions" hearbeat Working Draft

Being new to this process, can you explain what sorts of objections are valid for "heartbeat" drafts?

I understand the description at
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups#three-month-rule>,
but would like more insight.

I certainly have some concerns, but want to raise them appropriately.
What is the goal of this draft, and what sorts of issues are we looking for before accepting it as a good update to pass on?

-john

--
John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation GPG Key: 61A0963B | http://status.fsf.org/johns | http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS

Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support freedom at <http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=8096>.
Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 20:56:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:33:01 UTC