- From: Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 14:43:33 -0500
- To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- CC: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
As am I. Thanks Chaals. On 3/3/2014 1:19 PM, Stephen Zilles wrote: > On behalf of my participation in the Task Force, I am OK with all the changes Charles agreed to and with his suggested replacement where he did not agree. > > Steve Z > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru] > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 10:07 AM > To: Ralph Swick > Cc: public-w3process@w3.org > Subject: Re: New draft > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:59:34 -0800, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org> wrote: > >> Thanks Chaals. >> >> I did one more quick-ish top-to-bottom read. From that I have the >> following small suggestions: > > Thank you. I consider all the changes as purely editorial, and I have the following proposals to address them. I will incorporate them in a draft, and the TF can object to the changes if they want. > > I expect to post the draft tonight, while posting the current draft to the AB this morning (for consideration as their proposal to the AC) with a note that these changes may be made. > >> 7.1 W3C Technical Reports, second paragraph: >> >> "If /+the Director determines that+/ W3C member review >> /-agrees that-//+supports+/ a specification >> /-should be-//+becoming+/ a Standard..." >> >> The important change here is the first one; not removing the final >> decision from the Director. The other changes are just grammar to >> make the sentence less awkward. > > Agreed. > >> 7.1.2 Maturity Levels, CR, second Note: >> >> "Candidate Recommendations /-will normally be accepted as-/ >> /+are expected to eventually become+/ Recommendations." >> >> Reduce the risk of misinterpretation of this sentence as "the outcome >> is predetermined." > > The outcome ought to be close to predetermined. There are two sides to the issue - the Working Group should have made their CR good enough to be a Rec, and people better get their final review done if they haven't already, or they really will lose their opportunity. > > How about "are expected to be acceptable as"? > > In particular I don't want the "eventually" (it reads too closely to "maybe sometime in some form" in native english, and "accidentally" in non-native english). > >> 7.2.3.1 Wide Review, first sentence: >> >> "... by the /-p-//+W3C P+/rocess." > > Agreed. > >> Explicit reference. (Lowercase "process" includes an aggregation of >> existing and future best practices, etc. which may eventually lead to >> more precision.) >> >> >> 7.5 Proposed Recommendation, a Working Group, 3rd bullet: >> >> "... other than by Advisory Committee representatives /+acting in >> their formal AC representative role+/ ..." >> >> I understand the intent of this exception to be that an issue raised >> by an AC Rep as part of formal AC Review is meant to be a comment to >> the Director, which the Director may discuss further. An AC Rep may >> also be a participant in a Working Group or may submit a comment to >> the Working Group as part of public review. Such comments should not >> be treated differently just because the commenter has another formal role. > > Agreed > >> 7.6 W3C Recommendation, first sentence: >> >> "/+The decision to advance a document to Recommendation is a >> >> [http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#def-w3c-deci >> sion W3C decision].+/ In addition to meeting ..." >> >> This formalism from the current Process section 7.4.5 binds to the >> formal definition of AC Review, appeal, etc. > > Agreed > >> 7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note, final sentence: >> >> "Working Group Notes/-, only for W3C Recommendations-/." >> >> This additional statement is unnecessary here and it creates the risk >> of future conflict if the Patent Policy is revised to cover other things. > > Indeed. Agreed. > > cheers > >> -Ralph >> >> On 2/20/2014 5:55 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> there is another draft dated 20 February. The only change is to add >>> an explicit requirement for the director to announce the publication >>> of a revised Candidate Recommendation. >>> >>> As far as I know there are no outstanding comments or issues, so I >>> hope we will resolve to present this draft to the AB as our >>> recommendation for a new Chapter 7. >>> >>> The draft is https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/7b98193bc9d9/tr.html >>> and the changelog is at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/ >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> Chaals >>> >> > > > -- > Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex > chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com >
Received on Monday, 3 March 2014 19:43:39 UTC