- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 13:51:44 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Introductions`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: Introductions<br> <florian> Florian, Invited Expert<br> <Rossen_> Rossen, Microsoft<br> <emilio> emilio, Mozilla<br> <astearns> Alan Stearns, Adobe<br> <fantasai> Elika J Etemad aka fantasai, Invited Expert<br> <miriam> Miriam, Invited Expert<br> <TabAtkins> Tab Atkins: Google<br> <iank_> Ian Kilpatrick, Google<br> <lea> Lea Verou, Invited Expert<br> <lea> Chris Lilley, W3C<br> <lea> prsent+ ChrisL<br> <rachelandrew> Rachel Andrew, Google<br> <fremy> Francois REMY, Invited Expert<br> <jfkthame> Jonathan Kew, Mozilla<br> <oriol> Oriol Brufau, Igalia<br> <dbaron> David Baron, Google<br> <TabAtkins> ScribeNick: TabAtkins<br> <TabAtkins> chris: We have a charter, but it's running out<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: We have two years (tried for three once, but people complained)<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL_: kinda pointless, this is a permanent group, but whatever<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL_: made a new charter based on the new template<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL_: it's supposed to list all our drafs and status and such, been done<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: last year we had 10 specs we said would get to rec. 3 of them made it, 7 didn't<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: it's worthwhile discussing what specs we do think can get to Rec this year<br> <Rossen_> q?<br> <florian> q+<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: also there was some lang in th enew template that i actually prefer the old lang. you can se ein the diff<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: anything else that people think should be changed - tried ot keep it as simple as possible<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: AC doesn't like changes, they'll want justification<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: So that's it. shouldn't take long to get this agenda done<br> <Rossen_> ack florian<br> <TabAtkins> florian: Two comments. You say you started from the template<br> <TabAtkins> florian: But to the extent we can I'd like to keep our existing text. and template isn't a requirement<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: normally when i do a new charter i'd start from template. here we started from existing, changed to template, looked at diff, and chose piece by piece<br> <TabAtkins> fantasai: changes look fine to me<br> <TabAtkins> florian: You also said we need to list milestone<br> <TabAtkins> florian: charter says milestone dates "when avaialble" if not available we can skip, and that's intentional<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: we tried to do that in the last charter iteration, but wasn't allowed<br> <TabAtkins> florian: AC or PLH?<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: both, we were asked why no milestones<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: just the path of least resistance<br> <Rossen_> q?<br> <TabAtkins> florian: thanks for doing this, btw<br> <TabAtkins> chrishtr: I think we have more specs in our charter than all other WGs combined; we're >50% of the entire official output of the W3C<br> <TabAtkins> s/chrishtr /chrisl/<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: So like Variables I'd like to take to Rec today, maybe MQ4.<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: Deciding can be done in the issue, if people want to shift timelines<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: meanwhile charter is doing horiz review, that takes a few weeks<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: then it'll go to W3M, then AC for comments<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: That may run out our charter time, if so we'll get 3mon extension, no big deal<br> <TabAtkins> florian: If you get pushback on boilerplate rather than substance, happy to pushback from the AB side<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: So that's it unless there's questions<br> <florian> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7468<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: Part of th enew process requires, if you have a CR, you ahve to repub every 6 months, otherwise you ahve to publish a heartbeat explaining why<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: New thing.<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: So for the next year I'm gonna be a huge pain in the ass<br> <TabAtkins> florian: Just fyi the process req is a SHOULD, and that's good if things have changed. if they haven't changed, not required and probably shouldn't<br> <TabAtkins> chrishtr: Right, anything that is in the ED but not in the CR isn't covered by patent policy. If it hasn't change,d we're missing nothing<br> <dbaron> s/chrishtr/ChrisL/<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7468#issuecomment-1201235455 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 1 August 2022 13:51:46 UTC