regrets Re: FIRST DRAFT Agenda for the Process Call Wednesday 24 Mar 7am PDT

My regrets - I have a standing clash, and am only likely to make the call  
on an exceptional basis.

cheers

Chaals

On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 12:17:43 +1100, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:

> One question about the agenda inline.
>
> On 3/22/2021 8:38 PM, Dave Singer wrote:
>> Webex at  
>> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-w3process/2019May/0000.html>
>>
>> IRC is #w3process
>>
>> Log of prior meeting at  
>> <https://www.w3.org/2021/03/10-w3process-minutes.html>
>>
>> Usual meeting time: SECOND and FOURTH WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH AT 7AM  
>> PACIFIC. See <https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/w3process/calendar>
>>
>>
>>
>> Overall purpose: still trying to close down 2021
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) Assign scribe, etc.,
>>
>> 2) Agenda bash.
>>
>> 3) Agenda+ <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/Agenda%2B>
>>
>>    3.1) #509 Switching Tracks  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/509>
>>
>>    3.2) #511 Define minutes  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/511>, Pull #512  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/512>
>>      But see also
>>     #322 What are the rules for where/how W3C publications are  
>> developed? <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/322>
>>     #338 Decisions <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/338>
>>
>>    3.3) #312 Suspension / Removal for cause  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/312>
>>      We seemed to settle on somewhat improved clarity here, and #432  
>> was merged and closed, yet the D-F branch and our working P2021 copy  
>> and what’s proposed here all differ.
>
> It would help me if someone could provide a more complete summary of  
> what we are discussing.
>
> I see that the P2021 label was removed.
>
> Also the long discussion thread morphs into several issues.  I can't  
> tell what the actual discussion is for tomorrow.
>
>>
>>    3.4) Editorial, but some controversy in the past, so decide:
>>    #513 Keep or remove Note about delegation from CEO/Director to Team  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/513>
>>
>>    3.5) Maybe not for this year:
>>
>>    #310 (Director-free) TAG chair selection timing  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/310>
>>    #313 (Director-free) Team-Appointed TAG Chair(s)  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/313>
>>
>>    #505 Define a role of "Alternate AC Rep" & enable them to perform AC  
>> duties when necessary <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/505>
>>      Suggest we ask the team to give considerations of the easy, and  
>> binding, ways to do this?
>>
>>
>> 4) 2021 ‘flagships’ and progress.
>>
>> 4.1) Tooling: #436 New section on tooling  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/436>
>>
>>     I suspect we are losing sight of both where we are and where are  
>> are going. Review and plan.
>>
>>     Overall, I think we are waiting on anything that PSIG members or  
>> PSIG wants to comment on, and a review from the AB on tooling, if we  
>> can land it.
>>      4.2) Registries.
>>     I believe we have addressed survivability in what we wrote and we  
>> can close:
>>       #330 Survivability of registries  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/330>
>>
>>     Time to start working on the Guide and closing:
>>     #329 Guidance for registry creation  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/329>
>>
>>    4.3) Notes.
>>       #501 Abandoning a Note  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/501>
>>
>> 5) Clean up our Pull Requests (Editor to guide us?)  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pulls>
>>
>> #299 Any decision can be objected to
>> #401 Proposes changes to wide/horizontal review; lots of discussion,  
>> what can we land?
>> #433 Simplify the text on liaisons. Does this go back to the AB, as it  
>> touches on members that are consortia (maybe they should be liaisons  
>> with a specific WG?)
>> #434 (face to face) Meetings of new groups are 8 weeks from charter  
>> approval
>>
>>
>> 6) Are we on for seeing the end of P2021?
>>     6.1) Remaining P2021 Priority issues:
>>      Can we close this?
>>       #130 Enumerate the requirements for wide review  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/130>
>>
>>      Propose we leave this open and continue to ask ‘how?’:
>>       #356 Streamlining the Process Document  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/356>
>>
>>     Review hanging paragraphs and make sure they are harmless, and  
>> simplify sections that have only one subsection:
>>       #424 Eliminate 'hanging paragraphs'  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/424>
>>
>>     Provide a better ‘roadmap’ in the Introduction:
>>       #423 Section 1 (Introduction) should help navigate the document  
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/423>
>>         Volunteer?
>>
>>     6.2) Cherry-picked from the P2021 Milestone:
>>        Also from AC Review
>>        #347  Streamlining horizontal reviews
>>        #103  Should the process allow REC->WD transition directly?
>>
>>        #60    Clarify the voting process AC-review (we’re never going  
>> to have a document that reflects reality, this is here just as a joke  
>> so we can all laugh or cry)
>>
>> 7) Issues that  the AC gave us last time we asked for a review; we  
>> should probably try to clean up?
>>
>> <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/AC-review>
>>
>>
>> The usual closers:
>>
>> 8) Next meeting.  14 April  
>> <https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/w3process/calendar#card-89dd2215-93d3-4af8-971c-931529bc227d-20210414T070000>
>>
>> 8) Any other business.
>>
>>
>> David Singer
>> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple
>>
>> singer@apple.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Charles "chaals" Nevile
ConsenSys Lead Standards Architect

Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2021 06:48:37 UTC