closing issues...


there are a handful of issues I'd like to deal with quickly. By email, if  
we can:

ISSUE-56 questions how groups outside W3C are contacted to ensure review.  
A major thrust of the proposal is to let Working Groups work out how to  
get review and show they did it effectively, instead of the current  
requirement which boils down to showing a series of announcements were  
made. This is no different whether the relevant community is inside or  
outside W3C, and there are specific requirements around groups who are  
identified as having a dependency on the spec, wherever they are. I  
propose to close this issue.

ISSUE-60, ISSUE-61, ISSUE-62, ISSUE-63 and ISSUE-64 are all things that  
should and will happen when Chapter 7 is intergrated into a new full  
process document. I suggest we let them sit until we're ready to do that.

ISSUE-65 is about defining the terms "stable" and "unstable". I believe  
they are used in their normal sense and so definition is unnecessary, and  
propose closing the issue.

ISSUE-67 suggests that we can teach people the existing process instead of  
changing it, and that will solve our problems. I don't believe this is  
true, as I explained in and  
propose we close this issue.

ISSUE-68 is apparently redundant with ISSUE-39 (and my request for  
clarification indentifying any differences was unanswered). I propose we  
close it.


Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex         Find more at

Received on Thursday, 5 December 2013 07:18:09 UTC