Re: [w3c/charter-html] Charter must state a reason when duplicating work done elsewhere (#139)

While I think the discussion of this question is important, given the variety of reasons people have for what they want in or out of a charter this doesn't seem a valuable addition to the charter so much as an invitation to engage in second-guessing the rationales behind AC review, or to dump review comments (some of which are not made publicly and potentially some of which are Team-confidential) *in toto* into the charter.

The mandate of the WG is to work on the specifications that are listed as deliverables, to seek explicit approval from the AC to add anything to that list, and effectively if something is going to be dropped to inform the AC that this is the case - as we have done at AC meetings in particular.

I note that in the particular re-charter proposed here, we're looking for advice on whether or not to take up two deliverables produced through incubation and W3C-based processes, and whether to split off a piece of work in order to clarify an IPR/participation situation. None of the above seems directly related to the questions raised in this issue.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/139#issuecomment-303084397