Re: [webappsec] pre-Agenda: Conf Call work mode

Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org> wrote:
>> One of the issues there is that webappsec drafts state that feedback
>> must be sent to the mailing list. Implicit in that is the possibility
>> that feedback that is delivered via other channels may not be
>> considered valid. That's why I always send my feedback to the list and
>> never file issues in the issuer tracker.
>
> They say "The public mailing list public-webappsec@w3.org is preferred for
> discussion..." right?

I didn't even realize they said that, since I don't read that part of
the documents. I was referring to boilerplatish text, e.g. from the
CSP2 CR:

> Feedback:
>   public-webappsec@w3.org with subject line “[CSP2] … message topic …” (archives)

And, more importantly, this text from the Charter [1]:

"Any resolution first taken in a face-to-face meeting or
teleconference [i.e., that does not follow a 7 day call for consensus
on the mailing list] is to be considered provisional until 5 working
days after the publication of the resolution in draft minutes,
available from the WG's calendar or home page. If no objections are
raised on the mailing list within that time, the resolution will be
considered to have consensus as a resolution of the Working Group."

Thus, providing feedback on the mailing list really is more meaningful
than giving the same feedback in the issue tracker. The charter
definitely seems to allow objections mentioned only in the issue
tracker or anywhere else other than the mailing list to be ignored by
the working group,

Also from the charter: "This group primarily conducts its work on the
public mailing list public-webappsec@w3.org (archive)."

Cheers,
Brian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2015/03/webappsec-charter-2015.html

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 07:49:42 UTC