Proposed wording comment 9 appeal -> Re: dropping the request -> Re: w3process-ACTION-47: Produce a proposal for addressing wayne's "comment 9" - allowing appeal where the director's decision isn't the same as the proposal sent for review.

I think we have more agreement that there is a problem.  Is there any 
disagreement with the following language to fix it?
(also adds the relicensing appeal which was previously approved as a new 
appeal and just needs to be added to the list)

CURRENT TEXT
[[
When Advisory Committee review immediately precedes a decision, Advisory 
Committee representatives MAY only appeal when there is dissent 
<http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#def-Dissent>. These decisions 
are:

  * Publication of a Recommendation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#rec-publication> or
    Publication of a Rescinded Recommendation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#proposed-rescinded-rec>,
  * Activity creation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#ActivityProposal>,
    modification
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#ActivityModification>, or
    extension <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#ActivityExtension>,
  * Working or Interest Group creation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#cfp> or extension
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#charter-extension>,
  * Changes to the W3C process
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#GAProcess>.

]]


PROPOSED TEXT
[[

When Advisory Committee review immediately precedes a decision, Advisory 
Committee representatives MAY appeal the following decisions, with the 
exception that appeal is not permitted if there is no dissent 
<http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#def-Dissent> and the Director 
approves the proposal without substantive change . These decisions are:

  * Publication of a Recommendation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#rec-publication> or
    Publication of a Rescinded Recommendation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#proposed-rescinded-rec>,
  * Working or Interest Group creation
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#cfp> or extension
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#charter-extension>,
  * Relicensing Unfinished Specifications,
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/relicense.html>
  * Changes to the W3C process
    <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#GAProcess>.

]]


On 2015-03-20 05:02, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
> 20.03.2015, 12:02, "Olle Olsson" <olleo@sics.se>:
>> On 2015-03-19 22:57, David Singer wrote:
>>>   .......
>>>>   For that list of decisions after AC Review that can be appealed, the only exclusion not allowing appeal should be approval of the proposal without substantive change with no AC Review dissent (formal objection).  i.e. everyone agreed and nothing changed so even though its in the list, no appeal in that case.
>>>   And indeed if a re-review is requested, you can’t now comment on unchanged material!
>> A change somewhere that seems to be local may  actually influence how
>> other unchanged text will be interpreted. If someone accepted that other
>> text in its original formulation, they might reject it after a change is
>> done somewhere else.
> Right.
>
> If the director decides to follow the original proposal, and nobody dissented from that, I am happy to say "no appeal".
>
> If the director starts changing things, I'd rather leave in the possibility of appeal on the off-chance that the changes were more controversial than they seemed to the director.
>
> Given the scarcity of appeals (and the overwhelming difficulty of mounting one) I think this an exception-handling mechanism that isn't going to have a high cost, but not having it available seems to be a mistake (as Wayne pointed out in the first place).
>
> cheers
>
>>>   .....
>>>   David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Olle Olsson   olleo@sics.se   Tel: +46 8 633 15 19  Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
>>           [Svenska W3C-kontoret: olleo@w3.org]
>> SICS [Swedish Institute of Computer Science]
>> Box 1263
>> SE - 164 29 Kista
>> Sweden
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>