public-w3process@w3.org from February 2015 by author

chaals@yandex-team.ru

• Re: w3process-ISSUE-158 (New or continued WG?): Does rechartering extinguish a WG or continue it? [Process Document] (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-156 (Errata vs REC track process): Do we need separate Errata and REC Track Processes? [Process Document] (Sunday, 8 February)
• Issue timing Re: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Sunday, 8 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Sunday, 1 February)

David Singer

• Re: Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Monday, 2 February)

Delfí Ramírez

• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)

Doug Schepers

• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)

fantasai

• Re: Advisory Board Will Review of the Current Editor's Draft of Process2015 on February 12, 2015 (Sunday, 8 February)
• Re: Advisory Board Will Review of the Current Editor's Draft of Process2015 on February 12, 2015 (Sunday, 8 February)
• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Sunday, 8 February)

Jeff Jaffe

• Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Monday, 9 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Saturday, 7 February)

Léonie Watson

• RE: w3process-ISSUE-158 (New or continued WG?): Does rechartering extinguish a WG or continue it? [Process Document] (Thursday, 12 February)

Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)

• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Tuesday, 3 February)

Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker

• w3process-ISSUE-158 (New or continued WG?): Does rechartering extinguish a WG or continue it? [Process Document] (Thursday, 12 February)
• w3process-ISSUE-157 (editorial CR revision): Requirements for republishing a CR with non-substantive changes [Process Document] (Thursday, 12 February)
• w3process-ISSUE-156 (Errata vs REC track process): Do we need separate Errata and REC Track Processes? [Process Document] (Sunday, 8 February)
• w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Saturday, 7 February)

Stephen Zilles

• [Issue-152] Note for Draft Process Document (Saturday, 28 February)
• RESOLUTION: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Agenda Process Document Task Force 24 February 2015 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Cancelled: Process Document Task Force Telcon for 17 February (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Monday, 9 February)
• Should there be a Public Channel for AC Review Comments (was ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154) (Monday, 9 February)
• ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Resolution of Issue-154 (Sunday, 8 February)
• List of Issue in the Revising the W3C Process Tracket that are Not Currently viewed as being In Scope for the Process Document TF (Sunday, 8 February)
• List of Process Document Issue Not Currently Covered in the Process 2015 Draft being reviewed (Sunday, 8 February)
• RE: w3process-ISSUE-155 (Errata Access in RECs): Errata access from TR page [Process Document] (Saturday, 7 February)
• Process Document TF Telcons for 2/3 and 2/10 are cancelled (Monday, 2 February)

Wayne Carr

• Re: w3process-ISSUE-158 (New or continued WG?): Does rechartering extinguish a WG or continue it? [Process Document] (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: w3process-ISSUE-154 (AC review default confidenitality): SHould there be a default confidentiality level for AC reviews? [Process Document] (Wednesday, 4 February)

Last message date: Saturday, 28 February 2015 23:59:10 UTC