Re: Proc Doc: time to Slash and Burn, Divide and Conquer, or what?

On Thu, 23 May 2013 16:35:56 +0400, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
wrote:
...
> Sections that should be moved to a collaborative editing environment to  
> facilitate continuous updating:
[...]
> * 12. Process Evolution - this should become something like "goto the  
> public-w3process CG"
>
> Sections that should require consensus before updating:

Whose consensus?

I think the answer here is "The members" - i.e. the Advisory Committee.

> * 7. Tech Reports process.

Which makes me think the evolution section should not just be randomly
changed. I think it makes sense for most process discussion to be in this
CG, but IMHO the decisions belong to the AC. Whether the AB should
continue to function as a Working Group for the process document is IMHO
an open question, to be resolved between the AB and the AC.

But the CG makes a good place to hold discussions, where people who are  
affected by the process can express opinions for the AB/AC to take into  
account before attempting to decide what the world needs...

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
         chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 00:53:32 UTC