- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:39:11 -0400
- To: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- CC: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 6/17/13 9:09 AM, ext Jeff Jaffe wrote: > I'd be interested in your sense of the highest priority issues. The main pain point for me is the dependency "policy" blocks progress as I already mentioned in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013May/0020.html>. I also provided information re the Process Document in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013May/0015.html>. To expand on section 7 a bit ... * One change I think would be useful is to be able to go from CR to CR if no new features are added * It seems like PR could be eliminated if the Call for Implementations included a clear statement to AC reps that it was their last chance to submit comments. (For example, something like "this spec will advance directly to Recommendation after the group has satisfied the Director the spec has interoperable implementations".) Anyhow, it appears to me that combining LC and CR eliminates important checkpoints and creates too many other issues (to address a problem space that isn't entirely clear to me and apparently some others as well <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Jun/0021.html>). -AB
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 13:39:38 UTC