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

Re: Agenda Process Task Force Telcon on 21 October

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 19:39:57 -0400
Message-ID: <54459D4D.4050906@gmail.com>
To: Steve Zilles <steve@zilles.org>, public-w3process@w3.org
CC: ab@w3.org
Steve - your last few original agenda postings (sent via steve @ 
zilles.org) are _not_ included in the public-w3process archive nor the 
ab list archive. (I say `few` here because I only checked the last 2-3 
meeting agendas you sent.)

Your October postings to public-w3process that are included in the 
p-w3process archive were sent via via szilles @ adobe.com. Perhaps you 
should just use the adobe address when posting to p-w3process.

On 10/20/14 6:58 PM, Steve Zilles wrote:
>
> The call information for the Tuesday, 21 October, Process Document TF is
>
> Tuesdays14:00-15:00 UTC 
> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=08&day=26&year=2014&hour=14&min=00&sec=0&p1=0>(10:00am-11:00am 
> Boston local)
> Zakim Bridge+1.617.761.6200 <tel:+1.617.761.6200>, conference code 
> 7762 ("PROC")
> IRC Channel: #w3process
>
> For residents of other (typical) time zones the start times is:
>
> Pacific US
>
> 	
>
> Eastern US
>
> 	
>
> Central Europe
>
> 	
>
> Japan
>
> 	
>
> Australia
>
> 	
>
> UTC
>
> 7:00
>
> 	
>
> 10:00
>
> 	
>
> 16:00
>
> 	
>
> 23:00
>
> 	
>
> 24:00/0:00
>
> 	
>
> 14:00
>
> The purpose of these meetings has been to agree on the resolution of 
> open issues, close them where possible or assign actions to move 
> toward closure.
>
> Agenda:
>
> 1.Review Open Action Items
> https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/actions/open
>
> 2.Issue-140: The description of the Team in Section 2.2 of the process 
> document is out of date 
> <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/140>
>
> 3.Issue-137: Rationalise the heartbeats in chapter 6 and 7 
> <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/137>
>
> 4.Issue-141: Improve Errata management in W3C 
> <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/141>
> This is a relatively narrow issue. For reasons of process and 
> practice, W3C working groups do not necessarily issue errata in an 
> expeditious fashion. We should fix the W3C Process so that it 
> encourages groups to consistently and expeditiously issue errata. 
> There are other related topics, such as where the errata should 
> reside, that are not part of this issue, but separate issues. See 
> also, the discussion at last week’s Telcon:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0138.html
>
> and Proposal and associated discussion thread beginning at:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0139.html
>
> 5.Issue-144: Chairs are asking for clarification for Wide Review 
> <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/144>
>
> This is the “issue” in the Process CG Tracker, but the discussion has 
> been wider than this and includes a CfC for mailing list (but, in 
> principle, a public notification system that could be any or all of 
> mailing list, DB, Webpage, calendar notification) that can be used to 
> indicate a desire for “wide review” of a given document. All of the 
> concerns are in scope for this discussion.
>
> See thread announcing the results of the CfC:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0157.html
>
> And if time is available:
>
> 6.Issue-138: Does the process assume ‘an’ editor, or is group-editing 
> formally ok? <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/138>
>
> 7.Issue-97: Is using the term "Board" in "Advisory Board" really 
> accurate and representative? 
> <http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/97>
>
> 8.Any other business
>
> For reference, The current editors draft of the Process Document [1].
>
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/cover.html
>
> Steve Zilles
>
Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 23:40:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:12 UTC