- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 21:18:27 -0600
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Cc: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Murray Maloney wrote:
>
> [...]
>>
>> I would be happy to be part of a process that led these documents to
>> REC in time,
>> especially if the test cases were to take priority within the WG.
>
> I'm inclined to ask at this point if we *do* have an option for more time.
Yes, at least sort of.
Our charter gives us a certain amount of time; in particular, it
allocates a certain amount
of W3C staff resource ("one engineer at 25% for the duration of the
Working Group",
i.e. thru Q3 2007). We can't unilaterally change our charter, but if we
have a good
case, we can ask The Director to change our charter, with notice to the
W3C membership.
"To extend a Working Group or Interest Group charter with no other
substantive modifications, the Director announces the extension to the
Advisory Committee. The announcement MUST indicate the new duration,
which MUST NOT exceed the duration of the Activity to which the group
belongs. The announcement MUST also include rationale for the extension"
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#charter-extension
Any request we make for more staff resources competes with lots of other
requests.
I encourage the WG to wrap up pretty soon.
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 25 February 2007 03:18:33 UTC