- From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 10:58:53 -0700
- To: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
- Cc: public-w3process@w3.org, szilles@adobe.com
> On May 9, 2016, at 22:18 , Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> wrote: > > Hello all > > Request: > - provide a definition for our use of the term "Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)" in the Liaisons section. > https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#Liaisons > > > Rationales: > - the Team is often asked to sign "MoUs" with other organizations that are just simple liaisons from our point of view, that is, they do not justify Member review, but because the other parties call them "MoU", and insist on doing so, we are often in an unclear situation (is it a "real" MoU ? should we inform our members ?). > > - MoU is as good as any other similar name like "Agreement" or "Partnership", "Formal liaison", so we only need to provide details for our own meaning of the term, and need not to change it. > > > Proposed modification: > - no change to the text using the term MoU, only make the term a link to a new definition entry, that can be added elsewhere > > - Suggested new definition: > > "In the context of the W3C Process, an MoU is a formal agreement, i.e. a contractual framework with W3C rights and obligations, that involves joint deliverables, an agreed share of technical responsibilities with due coordination, and/or considerations for confidentiality and specific IPR. The agreement may actually be called something else that an MoU, and something called an MoU may not be a W3C MoU in that sense. In a formal definition, I would expect the term to be expanded: MoU: Memorandum of Understanding: … "something else that an MoU” -> "something other than an MoU” … Dave Singer singer@mac.com
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2016 19:01:46 UTC