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

Re: w3process-ISSUE-172 (Define MoU): What is a "Memorandum of Understanding"? [Process Document]

From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 14:52:44 -0400
To: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <111411cd-d071-1216-883d-c45b2ae4a9c3@w3.org>

On 8/14/2016 8:07 AM, Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker 
> w3process-ISSUE-172 (Define MoU): What is a "Memorandum of Understanding"? [Process Document]
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/172
> Raised by: Charles McCathie Nevile
> On product: Process Document
> This is raised on behalf of Daniel Dardailler.
> Request:
>       - provide a definition for our use of the term "Memorandum of
> Understanding (MoU)" in the Liaisons section.
>       https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#Liaisons
> Rationales:
>       - the Team is often asked to sign "MoUs" with other organizations
> that are just simple liaisons from our point of view, that is, they do
> not justify Member review, but because the other parties call them
> "MoU", and insist on doing so, we are often in an unclear situation (is
> it a "real" MoU ? should we inform our members ?).
>      - MoU is as good as any other similar name like "Agreement" or
> "Partnership", "Formal liaison", so we only need to provide details for
> our own meaning of the term, and need not to change it.
> Proposed modification:
>      - no change to the text using the term MoU, only make the term a link
> to a new definition entry, that can be added elsewhere
>      - Suggested new definition:
>        "In the context of the W3C Process, an MoU is a formal agreement,
> i.e. a contractual framework with W3C rights and obligations, that
> involves joint deliverables, an agreed share of technical
> responsibilities with due coordination, and/or considerations for
> confidentiality and specific IPR.

Most of this sounds good to me.  But the "or" clause might mean that if 
we go visit a Member and they require an NDA by their process (even if 
there is no exchange of information) that it would require Member 
approval.  So we may need to tweak this a bit.

>   The agreement may actually be called
> something else that an MoU, and something called an MoU may not be a W3C
> MoU in that sense.
> - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2016May/0034.html
Received on Sunday, 14 August 2016 18:52:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 14 August 2016 18:52:48 UTC