On 3/2/2017 1:31 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > In fact, this was not discussed yet. This is a discussion we may have > on our next call (on Monday); what would be good if we had information > on the preference of the ARIA WG. I am pleased to see that there is no > administrative obstacle on your side if we choose to go the joint > deliverable way. I think the ARIA WG is likely to be amenable to whichever direction Rich, Joanie, and I suggest. As you know my personal preference is joint but we haven't heard from Rich and Joanie yet. I don't think we can establish a formal preference of the ARIA WG before Monday, because many of us are at a conference and likely to be paying scant attention. I sent a brief question to the mailing list to give people an opportunity to register opinions: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Mar/0001.html Unless major objections are raised on that thread before Monday, I suggest you go with the approach that you guys end up supporting Monday, and structure the charter that way. Hopefully there will be a review opportunity of the draft charter before it goes to AC vote, and by then the ARIA WG will be able to establish if it prefers a different direction. It should be a one-line change in the charter if that ends up being required. Michael
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2017 15:27:14 UTC