W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > July 2016

Re: Updated Editor's draft

From: Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 08:45:35 +0000
To: Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20160711084535.GF29642@people.w3.org>

Comment on the 'supergroup' part, in section 5.2.6 
For every Recommendation Track deliverable that continues work on a Working Draft (WD) published under any other Charter (including a predecessor group of the same name), for which an Exclusion Opportunity per section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [PUB33] has occurred, the description of that deliverable in the proposed charter of the adopting Working Group must provide the following information:

"Predecessor group of the same name" would designate pretty much all 
rechartering occurences, not just supergroups (btw, can we stop calling
that supergroup? a supergroup is currently a group with taskforces, even if
that name does not appear in the Process)

If the intent is indeed to include all kinds of rechartering, what happens to
the current rule of 45 days grace period after the CfP for rejoining?
Also, the use of the term "adopting Working Group" seems to contradict the
inclusion of "predecessor group of the same name".

The current implicit continuation of licensing commitments in a WG would
disappear as well?

/me totally confused by this new wording.
Received on Monday, 11 July 2016 08:45:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:38 UTC