Re: Please Open ISSUE-34 (good standing)

On Sep 17, 2014, at 22:08 , chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:

> 
> 
> 16.09.2014, 21:41, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org>:
>> On 16/09/2014 17:03 , Daniel Glazman wrote:
>>>  On 16/09/2014 16:13, David (Standards) Singer wrote:
>>>>>  I agree that it has problems, that’s why I want to make it an
>>>>>  available tool rather than an automatic one
>>>  Then I suggest to move, for normal WGs (ie not the TAG nor AB), the
>>>  Standing provisions from Process to Charters. I am quite sure this
>>>  will mean the extinction of Standing in the near-term future.
> 
> Yeah, I agree we should move it to charters...
> 
>> I agree. Ideally, I would like the Process document to be short enough
>> that it can fit relatively comfortably in someone's head. The problem
>> when that is not the case is that people don't read it, or misremember,
>> which leads to all manners of things being claimed to be in the process
>> when they're not.
> 
> Absolutely
> 
>> I see where Dave is coming from here, but I don't think that the toolbox
>> should be in the Process document. We could easily have a library of
>> things that charters (which could also use being shorter and with a lot
>> less useless boilerplate) could simply link to.
> 
> Yes. In the process document I propose that we have about one line, saying that charters can include requirements on participants. I think it makes sense to state that they must be consistently applied - "what seems fair to the chair" doesn't strike me as quite good enough for open and transparent processes.
> 
> But since any such charter still has to get through AC review, I don't suppose we need to guess in advance what rules the AC are likely to think are fair and reasonable, since it is not clear what groups might want.

Right.  But since we may want to document Good Standing at least for TAG and AB, we may as well document it so other charters could (hypothetically, I think it unlikely) simply point and say “we use that”.  Offering pre-packaged ready-to-eat good-standing-ramen is easier than cooking it yourself.  Exactly which shelf that goes on I care very little.


David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2014 21:21:25 UTC