- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 21:44:32 -0400
- To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html-comments@w3.org, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 19:52 -0500, Shelley Powers wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: > > On 08/25/2010 08:04 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > >> Sam Ruby wrote: > >>> On 08/25/2010 06:28 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > >>>> I'm volunteering to write a change proposal for Issue 117. > >>> > >>> In that case, I encourage you to rejoin the working group. > >> > >> Is this a requirement? I can understand that it is simpler to only have > >> members propose change proposals--they need to be shepherded through the > >> decision process. I can withhold my submission for a time to see if > >> others volunteer. > > > > Being a member involves some binding obligations involving IP rights > > to the contributions you make. Agreeing to those terms is not optional. > > > > - Sam Ruby > > > I am assuming there is a form or some such thing I can agree to, if > that's the only concern. The form in the case is contained within the invited expert application. > People outside the group do file bugs. They need to have the ability to > pursue the bug if they're unhappy with the resolution. It's one thing to file bugs against a specification and expressed whether or not you agree with the decision of the group. It's an other to contribute to the group to the point of writing change proposals. Shelley, I understand your reluctance to be part of the group but, if you're going to be involved with it, I think you should be part of it. We won't (and can't anyway) force you to read every single email on public-html and you might in fact only interact around your change proposals. But starting to write change proposals without being part of the group doesn't make sense to me, Philippe
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 01:44:46 UTC