- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:19:16 +0200
- To: public-w3process@w3.org, "Liam Quin" <liam@w3.org>
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 21:40:31 +0200, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > Liam wrote >> 7. "An editor must be a participant, as a Member representative, Team >> representative, or Invited Expert in the Group responsible for the >> document(s) they are editing." >> This could be read as excluding e.g. a hired professional writer from >> editing a document, i.e. that in order to be called an editor, a person >> must be a WG participant; or it could be read as meaning "at least one >> of hthe editors must be a WG participant". In either case we could not >> (publish XPath with this rule, because it's developed jointly with two >> Working Groups. I know, I know, I'm being pedantic, but if we are >> writing a process to cover what we do, etc etc... > Yeah, there are several situations where this (existing) process > requirement is violated. It isn't clear to me that the rule should be > changed, although it is also unclear how to publish a document jointly. > This is probably worth addressing seriously, although I believe it is > orthogonal to any changes made so far, and could be done in a revision > along with other changes to the Process. I raised ISSUE-93 https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/93 cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2014 16:19:46 UTC