- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:41:11 +0100
- To: "public-native-web-apps@w3.org" <public-native-web-apps@w3.org>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: "Carr, Wayne" <wayne.carr@intel.com>
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:44:22 +0100, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote: > (apologies for posting this twice, but want to make sure Art and Charles > are CC'd as they are Web App WG's Chairs and their input is critical) > > On Thursday, 24 November 2011 at 20:55, Marcos Caceres wrote: > >> Putting it up now. > > http://www.w3.org/community/native-web-apps/charter/ As far as I understand the CG cannot *take over* errata, nor can it bin the Web Apps group, who are bound by their charter that is made by W3C and formally agreed by members. I suggest that you phrase the relevant bits as "will provide input on errata, ..." - it enables the same stuff. I'm not happy about the idea of a specification not being allowed to have a version number - in particular this interferesseriously with the notion of "done" and what you do next. Even worse is not being able to put a date there - it's actually important to be able to review changes through time, which means you need some notion of how to address things, and this seems to prohibit it, which strikes me as unnecessary bureaucracy. I'd like to see the charter say that drafts *must* be kept on W3C systems - someone telling me I have to log into some third-party service (which might well be a competitor's proprietary system that I would choose not to use) seems to me unacceptable for a community group. cheers Chaals -- Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 12:42:00 UTC