AB transparency with the ProcDoc? Yeah, right [Was: Re: New draft of chapter 7 proposal]

On 9/18/13 10:13 AM, ext Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
> Summary of changes:
> ISSUE-15: Reverted definitions of changes in specs to the current 
> process content
> ISSUE-26: Added a section on implementation experience (not quite the 
> AB proposal, but meant to reflect it)
> ISSUE-38: Moved the SHOULD document known implementations to a general 
> requirement
> ISSUE-40: I made Working Draft just one thing (no "heartbeats any 
> more") and updated the SVG accordingly.

In what Public forum were the "changes" for these Issues discussed? I 
didn't find discussion for any of these on public-w3process except an 
e-mail today on issue-38 and that just looks you talking to the AB.

SZ indicated the Process Document was going to be discussed in Public 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Jul/0014.html>. Why 
isn't that being done and what is going to be done to fix this?

Also, please provide the changeset(s) for each Issue.

-Thanks, AB

Received on Thursday, 19 September 2013 00:55:42 UTC