- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:37:10 -0400
- To: public-wai-cc@w3.org
[[ jb: Is there an update? rs: Will discuss again on Thursday's ARIA call ... Most people seem to be OK with giving Web Platforms exclusive publication ... Except that we do need adequate review time ... So, we're trying to figure that out. How much time ahead of CR publication, for instance ... Generally, people work on the doc and don't worry about ownership ... Any group could lose people and then the doc loses staff mc: Not sure the editors care either way, either that we leave it as is, or that we move it over ... Don't believe the joint status has imposed any burden ... Actually the proposed review time is greater than what we currently have ... I'm confident in current staffing on this doc, just worried about the future ... If there's no problem today, why remove our buffer? jb: Noting current status is joint, and PLH recommending keep it that way for now rs: Can PLH send an email to that effect? ]] https://www.w3.org/2016/08/31-waicc-minutes.html#item08 I left it as a joint deliverable in the proposed Web Platform Working Group in order to get the charter out to AC review sooner rather than later. I didn't want to hold the entire charter review on this issue. The deliverable should be associated with the group(s) actually working on the document. This means that the chair(s) and team contact(s) for those groups are accountable for the progress of the deliverable. Having a deliverable listed in a charter for the only purpose of ensuring proper review is not the approach I'd like to push forward in the future. We ought to do better than that when it comes down to wide reviews. Listing a deliverable in a charter carries patent commitments and call for exclusions, publication requirements, ties it to 2 group decision policies, etc. We must not do reviews at the last minute (cf recent i18n alarms) and any group is welcome to push back on a transition if they don't believe they received enough reasonable time to review. Philippe
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2016 12:37:18 UTC