Re: [VTT] Consensus call: publish VTT under the 2014 Process?

Is the question if using http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/ as
opposed to http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/ is OK? The
changes are summarized in
https://www.w3.org/wiki/ProcessTransition2014#What_are_the_main_changes_from_the_2005_Process.3F

If the only relevant difference is skipping Last Call Working Draft, I
don't have an issue with that.

For the record, I would be happy to not take WebVTT to REC at all. I
hope that the people who do want a WebVTT REC are also willing to do
all of the work involved.

Philip

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI: I suggested using the new publication process for the WebVTT spec in
> the TTWG to get it to REC. Let me know if you have any issues with that.
>
> Best Regards,
> Silvia.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>
> Date: 4 Sep 2014 04:58
> Subject: [VTT] Consensus call: publish VTT under the 2014 Process?
> To: "Silvia Pfieffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
> Cc: "Nigel Megitt" <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, "Timed Text Working Group"
> <public-tt@w3.org>
>
>
> On Sep 2, 2014, at 6:05 , Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It would be nice to use this for WebVTT.
>
> Do we have consensus to do this, please?
>
> If you are OPPOSED to using the 2014 process for the VTT document(s), please
> speak up, or I will ask for it to happen.
>
> I suggest I wait two weeks for a response, i.e. the deadline is the 17th of
> September in this year of 2014.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Silvia.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> FYI. At this stage I'm not proposing that we change our process: would
>>> anyone prefer to adopt the new process for one of our Rec track products?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Nigel
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/09/2014 12:45, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Chairs,
>>>>
>>>> As announced in August [1], today W3C groups may begin to request
>>>> publication of TR documents under the 2014 Process [2].
>>>>
>>>> Please note the following:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Pubrules [3] includes a requirement for new publications to include
>>>>   a reference to the governing process. Respec [4] supports this new
>>>>   requirement.
>>>>
>>>>   The pubrules checker user interface includes a new feature to
>>>>   identify the governing process. For now it defaults to 2005 since
>>>>   most documents are likely to be published under the 2005 process
>>>>   for a while; we will change that as the balance shifts. If you are
>>>>   checking a document to be published under the 2014 Process, please
>>>>   select that one in the interface.
>>>>
>>>> 2) We have updated transitions documentation for the 2014 Process [5].
>>>>   The transitions documentation for documents published under
>>>>   the 2005 process remains unchanged [5].
>>>>
>>>> 3) We have created a new version "Register an Internet Media Type
>>>>   for a W3C Spec" [7] for the new Process.
>>>>
>>>> For additional information about the transition to the 2014 Process,
>>>> please see the FAQ [8].
>>>>
>>>> If you have any questions, please contact me or the Webmaster
>>>> Jérémie Astori <jeremie@w3.org>.
>>>>
>>>> Ian Jacobs, Head of W3C Communications
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2014JulSep/0016.html
>>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/08/Process-20140801/
>>>> [3] http://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules
>>>> [4] http://www.w3.org/respec/
>>>> [5] http://www.w3.org/Guide/transitions2014
>>>> [6] http://www.w3.org/Guide/transitions
>>>> [7] http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype2014.html
>>>> [8] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ProcessTransition2014
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>>>> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> David Singer
> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>

Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 09:16:29 UTC