W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > August 2014

Re: w3process-ISSUE-109 (Unreviewed Charter Extension): Should AC approval be required to extend a charter [Process Document]

From: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:39:27 -0700
Message-ID: <53FD0C9F.6000909@linux.intel.com>
To: public-w3process@w3.org

On 2014-08-26 15:31, Wayne Carr wrote:
>
> On 2014-08-26 14:26, David Singer wrote:
>> On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:58 , Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/19/14 8:59 AM, Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue 
>>> Tracker wrote:
>>>> should we require an AC review or approval to extend a charter 
>>>> (sometimes, always, more than X amount of time)?
>>> Seems like it would be mostly `make work` to have a formal AC review 
>>> if the length (of a WG's charter extension) is relatively short. As 
>>> such, a formal AC review of a charter extension should only be done 
>>> if the extension is on the long-ish side, say 6+ months.
>> I also think we can trust that the staff will push back on repeated 
>> extensions without review.  However, would it be prudent to have a 
>> suggestion at least that charters be formally reviewed once the 
>> extensions have got to a certain length (e.g. 1 year, 1.5 years)?
>
> Could just have a limit on total length of extensions.  e.g. can 
> extend as long as the new termination date is no more than x months 
> after the approved charter's original termination.

Just realized a limit isn't really necessary since the extension can be 
appealed (and undone) if the AC objects.

>
>>
>>
>> David Singer
>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2014 22:39:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:11 UTC