Re: w3process-ISSUE-129 (CGs): Should the Process define Coordination Groups? [Process Document]

- sysbot+tracker@

I propose that we remove CGs, and merely note that one of the things a working group can do is to coordinate between different working (and/or interest) groups. And that in such cases, each coordinated group is expected to ensure they have representatives.

Such groups are perhaps more likely to work primarily in member space, but I don't see that as an issue to put in the process.

cheers

13.09.2014, 23:36, "Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>:
> w3process-ISSUE-129 (CGs): Should the Process define Coordination Groups? [Process Document]
>
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/129
>
> Raised by: Charles McCathie Nevile
> On product: Process Document
>
> Adopted from the AB, where it was discussed several times.
>
> Should the Process document define Coordination Groups, other than as a Working Group whose charter is explicitly directed at coordination?

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Saturday, 13 September 2014 22:02:25 UTC