public-w3process@w3.org from February 2014 by date

Monday, 24 February 2014

• Re: New draft Ralph Swick

Friday, 21 February 2014

• Re: New chapter 7 draft Charles McCathie Nevile

Thursday, 20 February 2014

• New draft Charles McCathie Nevile

Wednesday, 19 February 2014

• [minutes] 19 February 2014 Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference Coralie Mercier
• Re: New chapter 7 draft Jeff Jaffe
• Re: New chapter 7 draft Daniel Glazman
• Re: New chapter 7 draft Stephen Zilles

Tuesday, 18 February 2014

• Re: New chapter 7 draft Jeff Jaffe
• Re: Suggested edits [Was: Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7] Charles McCathie Nevile
• New chapter 7 draft Charles McCathie Nevile

Monday, 17 February 2014

• Re: Suggested edits [Was: Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7] Ian Jacobs
• Suggested edits [Was: Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7] Ian Jacobs
• Re: Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7 Charles McCathie Nevile
• Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7 Ian Jacobs
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Stephen Zilles
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: New draft - please review Jeff Jaffe
• Re: New draft - please review Stephen Zilles
• Re: New draft - please review Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Stephen Zilles

Sunday, 16 February 2014

• Re: New draft, with love... Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-86 (end of review?): When should the PR review end? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: New draft, with love... Jeff Jaffe

Saturday, 15 February 2014

• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Stephen Zilles
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-86 (end of review?): When should the PR review end? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Wayne Carr
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-87 (coming to CR): How to ensure you got wide review to enter CR [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Stephen Zilles
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-86 (end of review?): When should the PR review end ? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Stephen Zilles
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Stephen Zilles

Friday, 14 February 2014

• New draft, with love... Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-85 (editorial changes): Make editorial changes a may or should? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Charles McCathie Nevile
• w3process-ISSUE-87 (coming to CR): How to ensure you got wide review to enter CR [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker
• w3process-ISSUE-86 (end of review?): When should the PR review end? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker

Wednesday, 12 February 2014

• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Wayne Carr
• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs

Tuesday, 11 February 2014

• Re: Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Wayne Carr
• Ian Jacobs comments [Was: New draft - please review] Ian Jacobs

Monday, 10 February 2014

• Re: New draft - please review Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: New draft - please review Jeff Jaffe
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD Stephen Zilles
• RE: New draft - please review Steve Zilles

Friday, 7 February 2014

• w3process-ISSUE-85 (editorial changes): Make editorial changes a may or should? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker
• Re: New draft - please review Jeff Jaffe

Wednesday, 5 February 2014

• Re: New draft - please review Charles McCathie Nevile

Tuesday, 4 February 2014

• New draft - please review Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Please make the "Positive Work Environment Task Force" statement a living doc Coralie Mercier
• Minutes and summary of 3 February 2014 Chapter 7 Revision Task Force teleconference Coralie Mercier

Monday, 3 February 2014

• Re: Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February Charles McCathie Nevile
• Clarifying the steps from CR to Rec Charles McCathie Nevile
• Re: Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February Charles McCathie Nevile

Sunday, 2 February 2014

• Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February Stephen Zilles

Last message date: Monday, 24 February 2014 13:59:38 UTC