- From: Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 09:14:40 -0500
- To: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Dan Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On 02/11/2015 09:07 AM, Mike West wrote: > Forking this bit too, and dropping people from CC who aren't Brad, > Wendy, or Dan. > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com> wrote: >> There is some of this in the introduction, but I think for FPWD it is >> important to be very clear about goals for an initial community review - >> especially since this is new work not explicitly listed in our proposed >> charter. > > From a process perspective, do we need to explicitly list every > deliverable in the charter? If we come up with something new in the > future that's covered by the charter's scope > (https://w3c.github.io/webappsec/admin/webappsec-charter-2015.html#scope), > do we need to recharter in order to work on it? So long as it's in-scope, new work doesn't need to be listed as an explicit deliverable. All the same, statements of goals can be helpful to explain the work to readers. > > I prefer to work on smaller, more focused documents, as I have the > vague impression that it increases clarity. A rechartering requirement > would make it much more appealing to just jam everything into MIX or > CSP. :/ Keep at it! Our chartering practices are not anti-modularity. Thanks! --Wendy > > -- > Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest > > Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, Germany, > Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der > Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine > Elizabeth Flores > (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.) > -- Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office) Policy Counsel and Domain Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) http://wendy.seltzer.org/ +1.617.863.0613 (mobile)
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 14:14:47 UTC