- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:09:56 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: public-w3process@w3.org
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:23:50 -0800, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote: > On Nov 16, 2011, at 19:53 , fantasai wrote: >> This might need some mangling of the CR process to give the lawyers >> adequate time for review, but we should figure out what those >> requirements are and build those into the CR process instead of >> delaying protections until the test suite and implementation reports >> are done. > > +1 > > Is this not something that we can simply take to the PSIG for advice? Yes. The advice would be "this would require a change to the process for specifications to progress. Or a change to the patent policy, which is something beyond the chartered scope of PSIG"... cheers -- 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 Thursday, 17 November 2011 19:10:31 UTC