Re: [editing] Using public-webapps for editing discussion

Thanks for your clarifications Aryeh. One follow-up below re 
"contributions" to the Editing spec ...

On 9/22/11 12:43 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Arthur Barstow<>  wrote:
>> It seems to me, that by virtue of using public-webapps, it does give WebApps
>> WG a role e.g. to at least comment on the CG's editing spec. [Whether such a
>> role is "official" or not is probably just "splitting hairs".]
> I absolutely would like*comments*  from everyone who's interested,
> whether individuals or organizations or Working Groups.

It appears you are intentionally using "comments" here to differentiate 
"contributions". Is that right?

I ask because, as I understand the CG process: before a person can make 
a contribution to a CG spec, they must agree to a CLA for all of the 
CG's specs; and a CG is only supposed to accept contributions from its 
CG members.

If your CG uses WebApps' list, how will contributions from non-CG people 
be managed/tracked and how will the FSA be managed e.g. if non-CG 
contributions are accepted?


Received on Thursday, 22 September 2011 18:45:56 UTC