Scope Re: w3process-ISSUE-36:

On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 18:32:53 +0400, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>  
wrote:

> On 7/8/13 10:26 AM, ext Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue  
> Tracker wrote:
>> w3process-ISSUE-36: Should the waiting period required by the Patent  
>> Policy be changed? [Process Document]
>
> No.
>
> It seems to me that this effort - to update the TR process - should be  
> predicated on some basic axioms/assumptions and IMHO, one of them is  
> that updates to the PP should not be blocked on changes to the PP.

Updates to the Process should not depend on Patent POlicy changes? I agree.

> (If the PP truly is in play for this group [isn't that PSIG's domain?],  
> then please create a new `product` for the PP and move this Issue to  
> that product.)

The PSIG charter doesn't give them any authority over the Patent Policy -  
although they are of course free to discuss it if they want, and suggest  
how it should be changed. The Patent Policy is effectively part of the  
agreement between W3 and its members, and therefore functions as a part of  
the process that has some particularly complex legal implications.

I believe it is in scope for this group, although as with everything else  
we do, any decision we reach or set of possible alternatives we might  
suggest are for us to propose to the W3C membership (typically via the AB,  
although anyone who wants is welcome to see in advance because this group  
is public).

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Monday, 8 July 2013 17:07:58 UTC