W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2009

Re: HTML Working Group Decision Policy - for discussion

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:26:28 +0300
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F5386F48-54B2-4C64-999F-8A2F643416A1@iki.fi>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Oct 7, 2009, at 12:04, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> It's very important for Working Group members to read this document  
> and give questions or comments. Once we settle on a policy, we're  
> going to follow the procedures outlined and will expect Working  
> Group members to be the same. So now is a great time to ask about  
> things that are unclear, or suggest improvements.

It's unclear to me if issues can be revisited once an endpoint of the  
escalation process has been reached.

If person A escalates and indicates that (s)he'll produce a Change  
Proposal but fails and the issue becomes deferred, can person B re- 
escalate the same issue and undefer it? Can person A re-escalate? (I'd  
expect it to be out of order if person A re-escalates.)

If an issue has been resolved by consensus or vote (0, 5.a. or 6), can  
a person who was a participant of the WG at the time escalate the same  
or very similar issue? (I'd expect this to be out of order.) What  
about a person who wasn't a participant of the WG at the time of the  
consensus call or vote? (I think this wouldn't be out of order per se  
but would be disruptive to allow.)

Does anything above change if new information comes to light? Would an  
implementor trying to implement and finding flaws count as new  
information?

I gather that any feature that doesn't have two interoperable  
implementations will get dropped before REC even if the WG has voted  
to have the feature. Correct?

Is an accepted Change Proposal effectively an invariant section from  
there on? Or may the editor make editorial changes to the text? In any  
case, it seems to me that Change Proposals should come with a  
copyright waiver, assignment or license that makes the Change Proposal  
(if incorporated to a draft) not add restrictions to either how the  
WHATWG licenses spec or how the W3C licenses specs.

Can a person who isn't a participant in the WG submit a Change  
Proposal? If yes, does the person have to accept the PP to be allowed  
to submit a proposal?

This policy doesn't seem to cover how the WG decides to take on new  
deliverables. Is that intentional?

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 07:27:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC