- From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 22:42:37 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- CC: public-html-comments@w3.org
I'm not sure if this is a new addition to the decision process, or it was missed, but it was pointed out to me today that according to the HTML WG Decision Process, people who aren't members of the HTML WG may submit change proposals[1]: "Complete Change Proposals should be recorded somewhere in W3C space (wiki, dev.w3.org, archived mailing list) and the Working Group should be notified by email. If the author of the Change Proposal is not a member of the Working Group, then he or she should agree to the W3C Patent Policy and grant a non-exclusive copyright assignment as required for invited experts." I am willing to agree to the patent policy and grant copyright, and will so note at the bottom of all change proposals. I will use the text of the existing Patent Policy and copyright grant, only modifying it to remove references to Invited Expert. I will embed the text of the proposal, including the patent and copyright notices, in an email to the HTML WG comments email list, and see if I can prevail on an existing member of the HTML WG to send an email to the HTML WG email list, notifying the group of the proposal. Based on requests from co-chairs, or comments from HTML WG members, and members of the general public in the HTML WG comments email list, I will make necessary modifications to the proposal, and resend. It may be simpler for me to be a member, but I will not agree to joining in a probationary state, or to any restrictions not applicable to other members of the HTML WG. Instead, I'm offering a compromise, as noted in this email. Is this sufficient? Shelley Powers [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Received on Saturday, 11 September 2010 03:43:17 UTC