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

RE: Proposed W3C Process changes for MoU

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 20:14:13 +0200
To: Michael Champion <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
Cc: timeless@gmail.com, David Singer <singer@mac.com>, public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
Message-ID: <d95974e46f38033f7e968aefa489a0c2@webmail.sophia.w3.org>
On 2016-05-25 19:37, Michael Champion wrote:
> Is a "Memorandum of Understanding" essentially an agreement that
> somebody (Director? CEO?  Random person on the staff?) decides doesn't
> need a member review?

In our use of the term, it's the opposite: something that requires 
member review.

I'm not asking to change that, but to provide a definition for the term.



> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: timeless.bmo1@gmail.com [mailto:timeless.bmo1@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of timeless
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 10:27 AM
> To: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
> Cc: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>; public-w3process
> <public-w3process@w3.org>; Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
> Subject: Re: Proposed W3C Process changes for MoU
> 
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:58 PM, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:
>> In a formal definition, I would expect the term to be expanded:
>> 
>> MoU: Memorandum of Understanding: …
>> 
>> "something else that an MoU” -> "something other than an MoU”
> 
> agreed
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2016 18:14:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 25 May 2016 18:14:26 UTC