Re: publishing updates to the gap analysis/ road map and user research module

I don't think we should attempt to get any consensus like that from the 
WGs until after the holidays at this point, and I did warn that the 
chairs might not be able to put it on the agenda before the holidays 
when we discussed this a couple weeks ago. Now too many people are away 
already and a standing publication consent, which is a big decision, 
shouldn't be snuck through in that situation.

Even if you convince the chairs and manage to obtain it, I do not 
support publishing before January when there can be sufficient review of 
the proposed draft. I encourage Lisa and Roy to work over the next 
couple weeks on preparing a draft that is ready for review, but Roy 
please do not publish it until after the task force (and I) can take a 
look in January.

While I suggested obtaining a standing consent to publish, I meant that 
to remove some bureaucracy, not to remove the task force from the 
process. A draft published over the holiday would only have editor 
input, not sufficient task force and WG input, and that is not 
sufficient review for publication even with a standing consent on the 
record.

Michael


On 18/12/2017 4:45 PM, lisa.seeman wrote:
>
> Hi Folks
>
> The COGA Gap analysis and road map has been published with extremely 
> out of date information. The user research module is also very out of 
> data. Can we have the working groups consent to publish incremental 
> working drafts of the Gap analysis/ road map and user research module 
> without going though a CFC process each time from both working groups. 
> That way Roy and me might be able to get the current draft updated 
> over the holiday.
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter 
> <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>
>
>
>