Re: Wording question on update to 2.1.1

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 19:44:46 +0200, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Chaals and CG,
>
> I'm reviewing the process update, and noted this addition:
>  https://www.w3.org/2016/07/18-Process2016-diff.html#MemberBenefits
>
> "For all representatives of a Member that is a Consortium, as described
> in the preceeding two paragraphs, any IPR contributions are only those
> of the individual person or Consortium they are representing as no IPR
> commitments have been granted by the individuals' employers. "
>
> Suggest:
> s/as no IPR commitments have been granted by the individuals'
> employers/unless IPR commitments have been granted by the individuals'
> employers/
>
> While we would not as a matter of course get those commitments, it's
> possible that we would ask for and receive them.

+1 - I think this would be an improvement.

> also typos: s/preceeding/preceding/
> s/individual person or Consortium/individual person and Consortium/

Noted. I'll fix them in the next draft - thanks.

cheers

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2016 00:09:31 UTC