W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > August 2016

Re: Comments on Process 2016 (3 August 2016 Editor's Draft)

From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 16:46:13 -0700
Cc: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <65821CB4-5915-49A2-A9F7-51676D3A8DAE@mac.com>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
wow.  One reaction:

> On Aug 7, 2016, at 3:09 , Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
> 
>>  -------------
>>  It should be possible for the Director restore a Rescinded
>>  Recommendation. We cannot predict the future. Suppose the
>>  Director rescinded a Recommendation because of a patent issue
>>  but then that patent is invalidated. We might want to restore
>>  the Recommendation. The Patent Policy says:
>> 
>>    "If the Recommendation is rescinded by W3C, then no new licenses
>>    need be granted but any licenses granted before the Recommendation
>>    was rescinded shall remain in effect."
>> 
>>  I believe that allows room to restore a Rescinded Recommendation
>>  and get new licenses.
> 
> I agree here too, although it *feels* different. But the process is in all cases the same - an AC review, and subsequent Director's decision.
> 
> I wanted to call that out, before people reacted to the different feeling and suggested this was a different thing in practice.

I don’t think reversing a rescinsion is that easy at all.  We may, as a community, have taken steps consequent on something being rescinded and knowing it can’t get new licenses.  The licensors may have taken steps knowing that they cannot be asked to grant new licenses.  And so on.

I fear reversing rescinsion is not as simple as reversing obsoletion.


Dave Singer

singer@mac.com
Received on Monday, 8 August 2016 23:46:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 8 August 2016 23:46:43 UTC