W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > February 2014

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

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 22:00:19 +0100
To: "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, "Wayne Carr" <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.xbahyts4y3oazb@chaals.local>
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:37:06 +0100, Wayne Carr  
<wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:

>
> On 2/11/2014 9:32 PM, Ian Jacobs wrote:
>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 2:42 AM, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> - 7.5: "should not approve a Request for publication of a Proposed
>>>>    Recommendation less than 35 days after the publication of the
>>>>    Candidate Recommendation on which is it based [editor's note - this
>>>>    is to allow for the patent policy exclusion period to expire]"
>>>>
>>>>    Please simplify to:
>>>>
>>>>    "should not approve a Request for publication of a Proposed
>>>>    Recommendation sooner than 150 days after the publication of the
>>>>    First Public Working Draft." That's the duration used in the patent
>>>>    policy; it will be easier to explain and remember, instead of
>>>>    introducing a new number "35".
>>>>
>>> I think your suggestion would add a time constraint that doesn't need  
>>> to be there.  We don't need for the exclusion period for FPWD to end  
>>> before Proposed Rec can begin.  What we need is for Exclusion periods  
>>> for both the FPWD and last Candidate REC to end before the AC review  
>>> ends (at least a couple of days before to be able to react to it.
>> I based the proposal on our current practice not to start a PR review  
>> until all exclusion opportunities have ended:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq.html#mult-exclusions
>
> I think the proposal has had the exclusion period and AC review  
> overlapping since Proposed Rec went away.

Yep. With a minimum of 3 days for members to react to a last-minute  
exclusion.

>> Given that exclusions are rare, your proposed change seems reasonable.  
>> Do you think Members will say "Sorry, we don't want to invest in a  
>> review until the risk of exclusions is 0" or will they prefer the  
>> optimization?
>
> Maybe the process could include how excluded patent claims impact the AC  
> review and REC publication.  Maybe the end of the review is extended  
> until after how to deal with it has been resolved.  It's already 60 days  
> of waiting after the spec is done (for the exclusion period), so better  
> if the AC review could be concurrent with that instead of after it.

Actually, I propose to *change* the timing, so that the *end* of the  
review is at least 70 days after the expiry of any exclusion opportunity  
(i.e. currently 70 days after CR). And to say "at least 10 days after the  
end of any exclusion opportunity [PatentPolicy]"

But I raised issue-86 to be clear that this is what is happening.

cheers

Chaals

>> Ian
>>
>>> In 7.5 it says: "The deadline for Advisory Committee review of the  
>>> technical report must be at least 28 days after the publication of the  
>>> Proposed Recommendation."
>>>
>>> That could be: "The deadline for Advisory Committee review of the  
>>> technical report must be at least 28 days after the publication of the  
>>> Proposed Recommendation and at least 2 days after the completion of  
>>> all patent policy exclusion periods.  Currently that means at least  
>>> 152 days after FPWD publication and 62 days after the last CR  
>>> publication."
>>>
>>> So the quickest a REC could be produced would be about 153 days.   
>>> (with CR starting before the FPWD exclusion period ended and the 2  
>>> exclusion periods overlapping).
>>>
>> --
>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Friday, 14 February 2014 21:00:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:17 UTC