Re: Charter updates

Hi Brett,

We are in the same boat. As I understand it we need the charter to be quite
specific so that there is no ambiguity but at the same time not be
restrictive on the WG and how they choose to address the goals.

I think we have a pretty good balance at this point but let's see what the
group has to say.

Adrian

On 13 July 2015 at 18:50, Brett Wilson <brettw@google.com> wrote:

> Your diagram helps me understand what you're going for and I now get what
> you meant on the other thread. So that's great.
>
> I do worry that the diagram may be providing too much detail for what
> should go in a charter. It does say "example", and I'm not very familiar
> with charters to know how such things are normally done, so I'm happy
> deferring to others. But I do want to be sure that there is maximum
> flexibility to define how the final specification will work.
>
> Brett
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Have incorporated changes based on comments.
>> If you disagree with the changes or have further comments please let me
>> know.
>>
>>
>> http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/latest/charters/payments-wg-charter.html
>>
>> Also, note the diagram that I have added. Let me know if there are any
>> comments.
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>
>