Re: Requested addition to section 7.1

On 12/22/2016 04:44 PM, Jeff Jaffe wrote:
> I just want to make sure that I understand the use case.  Are you saying
> that without the MAY statement (that work may be incubated in WICG), that
> it would have been prohibited for CSS to pick up anything that was
> incubated in WICG?

The CSSWG can pick up anything that is in scope for the charter and is
presented for its adoption (and is not patent-encumbered), regardless
of the source. However, any such proposal is subject to the CSSWG's
review and evaluation, and the expectation is that it may be accepted,
rejected, or adopted with the provision that it needs significant rework
before being officially accepted.

The MAY appears to give special consideration to work prepared in the
WICG, and can be read (and has been read) as being a substitute for
review and development within the context of the CSSWG.


Received on Thursday, 22 December 2016 21:13:16 UTC