Re: Charter updates

>
>>My second foray [2] lead me to a Charter that was extended w/o its
>>Milestones being updated.

...

> IMHO that should not be the charter - being able to look at what the group  
> said it would do, and compare it with what it is doing is a pretty basic  
> tool for managing expectations and balancing resource commitments.


Agree.  Charters are a bit overloaded; one current proposed one even has a FAQ in it. It would be good to keep the “normative” text that defines the of what the WG can and cannot do  from the “explanatory” text that talks about who, what, and when. The team Director/team should have no leeway to change the normative text, but at least some ability to edit the explanatory text and schedule to reflect current reality.






-----Original Message-----
From: Chaals McCathie Nevile
Organization: Yandex
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 12:16 AM
To: "public-w3proce.", timeless
Subject: Re: Charter updates
Resent-From: <public-w3process@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 12:17 AM

>>
>>My second foray [2] lead me to a Charter that was extended w/o its
>>Milestones being updated.
>
>Yeah, that can happen as a consequence of reluctance on the part of chairs  
>to try messing with the charter - see above. On the other hand groups  
>should maintain some live information about their progress.
>
>IMHO that should not be the charter - being able to look at what the group  
>said it would do, and compare it with what it is doing is a pretty basic  
>tool for managing expectations and balancing resource commitments.

Received on Wednesday, 26 August 2015 15:34:07 UTC