W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > October 2017

Re: DRAFT-R1 Agenda Process Call Wednesday November 1st, 9am Pacific

From: Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 17:12:26 -0400
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
Cc: Advisory Board <ab@w3.org>
Message-ID: <993cb2f4-c138-9525-de05-f247e1bc9615@w3.org>
Regrets for the call. This conflicts with an ICANN Technical Experts
Group meeting.

Thoughts added in-line where I have them:

On 10/30/2017 07:15 PM, David Singer wrote:
> Please comment on the issues, as needed, and on this agenda, BEFORE the call, so we can complete the agenda in time. We have a HUGE agenda. Please come prepared to be efficient!
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full Webex Information is on our Mail Archives <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-w3process/2017Oct/0000.html>  (member only accessible, email me if this is a problem)
> 
> IRC is #w3process
> 
> 
> 1) Assign scribe, etc.
> 
> 2) Issues raised since we sent the document out for review.
> 
>   2.1) Issues that seem to be needing addressing, or can be addressed, in 2017, and are not editorial.
> 
>   <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20label%3AAC-review%20-label%3A%22Editorial%20Improvements%22%20>
> 
>  The first substantive issue here is WG voting. I think we should REVERT the PR #81 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/81> and simply add what we intended to 3.4, the defaults so that charters don’t need voting rules at all:
>   #109 Voting notice before it starts or before it ends? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/109>
>      — see #24 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/24>, which I re-opened as we are getting pushback. 
>          We simply need defaults for things that the charter might override (but need not).
>   #121 Revert section 3.4 default in WG voting rules to Process 2017 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/121>
>      — see #24 for the original issue <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/24>. We were merely seeking to (a) make sure that the charter requirements and the voting rules were in accord and (b) try to make it possible to write a charter without talking about voting, because there were sensible defaults in the process.  Our edit went beyond that. We should revert and simply add these defaults.

Sounds fine.
> 
> The second is on whether we need to codify Contribution IPR grants coming from anyone not under an obligation as a result of WG membership:
> #67 Clarify the handling contributions from guests, non-w3c members, and non-WG members <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/67>

I'd recommend to leave it out of Process, for Team handling.

> 
>   I think we should DEFER these:

+1

> 
>  #83 Written notification <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/83> 
>      — minor, and no suggested fix, and not related to new text in 2017. Defer?
>  #103 Should the process allow REC->WD transition directly? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/103> 
>      — minor, no suggested text, defer?
>  #107 Audit of Members / Quorum? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/107>
>      — major (‘zombie ac reps’)  but not related to the 2017 changes; defer?
> 
>  DB thinks we should REVERT this:
> 
>  #97 consider keeping 'other than to remove features explicitly identified as "at risk”’? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/97>
>      — revert?

fine to revert

--Wendy

> 
>  This one is trivial; some like completeness:
>   #112 appeals outcome that sustains the decision
>      — trivial; we need to say (for some people) what happens when an appeal is not successful
> 
>   Possibly No Change:
>   #123 Who at W3C can request publication of an Amended Recommendation? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/123>
>      — some misunderstanding here; we might need clarification, but this might be a ‘no change'
> 
> 
>   2.2) Editorial Issues that seem to be needing addressing, or can be addressed, in 2017
>      <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20label%3AAC-review%20label%3A%22Editorial%20Improvements%22>
> 
>   #82 Duplicated links
>   #108 Team Contact or Staff Contact?
>      — new text introduced “Staff Contact” for the AB and TAG, should be “Team Contact"
>   #110 Amended Recs currently appear to BE Candidate Recs <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/110>
>   #111 6.1.2 "editorial or other minor corrections"
>   #113 Capitalization of 'Host' in section 9
>   #114 "Reference Draft" and "Other Charter”
>      — this is related to the text introduced last year
> 
> 3) Other open issues: <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?utf8=✓&q=is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20-label%3AAC-review>
>   There are 25 of these. Should any be addressed as part of Process2018?
> 
> 4) Slides for the AC meeting (as time permits).
> 
> 5) Next meeting. December 13th, review after the AC meeting, and get started on the Process2019?
> 
> 6) Any other business.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> David Singer
> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office)
Strategy Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
https://wendy.seltzer.org/        +1.617.863.0613 (mobile)
Received on Tuesday, 31 October 2017 21:12:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:45 UTC