Re: CfC: Adopt Proposed Decision Policy

Hi All,

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:59 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 1, 2009, at 5:47 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>>> There are problems with this procedure, which will, most likely, arise
>>> regarding the issue of named entities.
>>>
>>> On the one hand, you have the individual who wants a change in the
>>> document; on the other, you have an editor willing to make the change.
>>> But no where in this do you have consensus of the group.
>
> I would be quite prepared to declare consensus on any document which has had
> adequate review and no remaining open issues or bugs.
>
>> I think you may be drawing an unwarranted assumption about the issue of
>> entities in XHTML. The reason we're discussing it on public-html is because
>> Ian did not want to make the change without discussion.[1] You are right
>> though that the policy allows an initial editor's decision to be made based
>> on an incoming comment, if the editor agrees.
>>
>>> In fact, no where in this, do you anything preventing the editor from
>>> making
>>> changes, even if there isn't consensus of the group, and as we've come
>>> to learn it's much more difficult to get an edit changed then to
>>> prevent an edit in the first place.
>
> Shelley, perhaps I'm jetlagged, but I simply don't understand this
> statement.

Shelley, are you saying that this working group should have the option
to turn the Commit Then Review (CTR) [2] process into a Review Then
Commit (RTC) [2] process at some point in the decision policy [3]?

I ask the chairs, at this juncture, does this working group have that authority?

Best Regards,
Laura

[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview
[2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ReviewThenCommit
[3] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Monday, 2 November 2009 15:16:39 UTC