Approving signals, Meeting tomorrow

The agenda 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VvIMSa-vc7Wt6AYAhQ3MrcZTJvuW8kv-QaNWWgbU7Vo/edit#> 
for tomorrow's meeting (28 January 2020 1pm ET 
<https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CredWeb&iso=20200128T13&p1=43&ah=1>, 
https://zoom.us/j/706868147)<https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CredWeb&iso=20200128T13&p1=43&ah=1> 
includes proposal to endorse a signal as "promising". Big day, since 
we've never actually made any decisions about signals before!

Please take a look, and try to read the signal's definition and 
description before the meeting. Comments or edits via email or in the 
google doc are welcome.  I'll save you a click, it's: Signal: Date 
Website First Archived 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gabi6ZwSvH-U-MTd3MG3RqEsSIAuKGD_OjG8RR0KL4g/edit>.  
This is one I wrote up after our brief discussion on it last week. 
Please forgive the slightly odd format; the intent is for this to drive 
software that produces a normal-looking W3C spec.

The only proposal made via email to the group was Owen's on Validity 
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credibility/2020Jan/0029.html> 
which we might discuss, but I don't think we'll be ready to decide on.

I'll try to write up a few other familiar ones for tomorrow, but I 
wanted to give 24hrs so people have time to at read the first one.

Optimistically,

     -- Sandro