- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:46:41 +0200
- To: "public-html WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:32:39 +0200, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:10 AM, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote: >> Fellow HTML Working Group members, >> >> In accordance with rechartering plans previously announced to the group >> by >> the HTML WG chairs[1], and outlined in the "HTML5 Stabilization Plan"[2] >> produced by the chairs, I have drafted a new HTML WG charter: >> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/ > > The first paragraph under the heading "Communication" has a dangling > reference that implies that the "Decision Policy" section should talk > about synchronous meetings even though it actually doesn't. I would > expect to find a ban on making decisions in synchronous meetings in > the "Decision Policy" section. Likewise. I believe Opera would formally object to the charter unless it has such a statement. Also: Scope section s/also know as the XHTML syntax/also known as the XHTML syntax/ /^\ The scope should by default refer to authoring tools as agents which process HTML syntax. 3.2 Liaisons In general I don't think liaisons for community groups need to be specified. The WHATWG is a community group specified as an external liaison, which makes sense, but in general since community groups can start and stop at any time, liaison with them should be "as appropriate". The rest looks reasonable to me, anticipating a re-charter in a couple of years... cheers Chaals -- Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan noen norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 11:47:26 UTC