Re: Reminder: Deadline today at 1pm ET [Was: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG]

On 12 April 2016 at 15:46, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

> Hello Payments WG,
>
> Please note that the deadline for responses to the Call for Consensus is
> 1pm ET today. For a summary of comments
> received so far, please see:
>  https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/wiki/CFC_20140412
>
> We look forward to hearing from you,
>

Suggestion: extend deadline 24 hours to include the responses that came in.


>
> Ian
>
>
> > On Apr 5, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish one or more documents as
> First Public Working Drafts (FPWD) of the Web Payments Working Group.
> >
> >       • Proposal 1: Publish "Payment Request API" as a FPWD
> >               •
> https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/paymentrequest.html
> >       • Proposal 2: Publish "Payment Request API Architecture" as a FPWD
> >               •
> https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/architecture.html
> >       • Proposal 3: Publish "Payment Method Identifiers" as a FPWD
> >               •
> https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/method-identifiers.html
> >       • Proposal 4: Publish "Basic Card Payment" as a FPWD
> >               •
> https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/basic-card-payment.html
> > For each proposal:
> >
> >       • We invite responses on this thread to each of the proposals.
> >       • Silence will be taken to mean there is no Formal Objection [1],
> but positive responses are encouraged. Publication as a FPWD does NOT
> indicate that a document is complete or represent Working Group consensus.
> >       • If there are no Formal Objections by 12 April 2016 (1pm EDT),
> the proposal will carry and the Chairs will request that the Director
> approve publication as FPWD(s).
> > The W3C Director takes Formal Objections seriously, and therefore they
> typically require significant time and effort to address. Therefore, please
> limit any Formal Objections to issues related to the scope of these
> documents rather than technical content where the Working Group has not yet
> made a decision. Please include substantive arguments or rationale for
> consideration by the Director.
> >
> > If there are Formal Objections, the Chairs plan to contact the
> individual(s) who made the Formal Objection to see whether there are
> changes that would address the concern and increase consensus to publish.
> Depending on the number and nature of the Formal Objections, the Chairs
> will either make a decision either to pursue FPWD and report the Formal
> Objections to the Director (as required by W3C Process), or to postpone
> publication until there is greater consensus to publish.
> >
> > If there is a decision not to publish a document, we will adjust our
> communications to let people know about the Editor's Drafts and the
> decision to delay their publication as FPWDs.
> >
> > NOTES:
> >
> >       • Publication of a FPWD is a signal to the broader community that
> we are seeking review of the specification(s) in their early stages. To
> frame that discussion, we plan to publish a blog post with the publication:
> >               • https://www.w3.org/2016/03/15-wpwg-blog.txt
> >       • Publication of a FPWD triggers an event under the W3C Patent
> Policy.
> >       • The Working Group discussed this Call for Consensus at its 17
> March 2016 teleconference
> >               • https://www.w3.org/2016/03/17-wpwg-minutes
> > For the Chairs, Adrian Hope-Bailie
> >
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#Consensus
> >
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>
>
>