Re: Progress on Push API

On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:02:43 +0200, EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA <efc@tid.es>  
wrote:

> Hi Chaals, all,

Hi,

> It was not intended to be an official W3C meeting, but just an informal  
> discussion to feed the official standardization track, which AFAIK this  
> mailing list is part of.

Right. But the boundaries are difficult to define. If you invite more  
people than the editors to a discussion that isn't archived on this list  
(or a specific list for your spec, where relevant), then I strongly  
recommend that you make it "a formal WG meeting".

As you know, that doesn't actually have to be very formal. Basically, you  
have to tell people where and when it is happening, and give enough notice  
to meet the process requirements. Ideally there would be minutes, or at  
least a rationale along with any proposals.

> As you may note my previous email was not imposing any agreement to the
> group but just proposing a set of changes and asking from feedback from
> other parties.

Understood - and that is a general part of how the group works: The  
requirement that decisions are made asynchronously, rather than imposed  
 from some meeting where people may not be able to attend.

> But sorry if my email has led to any misunderstanding.

No, it hasn't led to a misunderstanding, it shows that we (the chairs, but  
probably everyone) seem to have some misunderstanding in the group about  
meetings. As you know, this group tries to avoid having meetings unless  
they are for some purpose - but when we do have a purpose, we should be  
clear and hold a real meeting. And we do work to make that as simple and  
efficient as possible.

Again, I am pleased that you are making progress. That's the real reason  
we are here. But part of the chairs' job is to make sure we follow the  
"fairness" procedures of W3C. Another part of our job is to make that as  
simple as possible for everyone so it becomes the easiest and obvious way  
to do things.

cheers

Chaals

> Regards,
> Eduardo.
>
> On 29 abr 2014 at 15:42:40, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
>> Hi Eduardo, all,
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:00:15 +0200, EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA <efc@tid.es>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Last week the Push API editors (AT&T, Telefónica) and other interested
>>> parties (Mozilla, Google) met to progress this specification.
>>
>> Just a gentle reminder that if you are having a meeting there needs to  
>> be
>> an announcement of it. I don't want to stop people doing work -  
>> obviously,
>> we encourage that happening and applaud members who take initiative to  
>> get
>> things done.
>>
>> But there is a process requirement, that you and your employer agreed to
>> when joining the group. It isn't just a quid pro quo for the rest of us
>> agreeing to go through a PAG if necessary. It is also based on an
>> important legal requirement that standards be developed according to a
>> fair process, to avoid being construed as engaging in anti-competitive  
>> or
>> cartel behaviour.
>>
>> And of course it is good manners.
>>
>> As a quick reminder, the general notice times required are 1 week for a
>> "distributed" telephone meeting (unless it is a regularly scheduled
>> meeting) and 8 weeks for a physical meeting.
>>
>> If you want to organise a meeting for a particular topic the chairs and
>> staff contacts will be very happy to help, both to make sure we meet the
>> process requirements and with any necessary logistics. The notice period
>> is the only one likely to have any real impact, and there is a way to
>> approve shorter notice if it is really necessary.
>>
>> But I would ask people who want to organise a get-together that they
>> provide the notice required by the Process, to ensure that "interested
>> parties" in the working group have a fair opportunity to attend.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Chaals
>>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar  
> nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace  
> situado más abajo.
> This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and  
> receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
> http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 15:37:13 UTC