On 5/20/15 12:27, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>
> Writing it down in a way that reflects the tools we’re actually using
> rather than the boilerplate that has been in W3C charters for years
> helps everyone remember how we agreed to make decisions at the
> outset. For example, there might be disagreements about whether an
> editors’ draft reflects the WG consensus or not. To the extent we can
> leverage GitHub’s “paper trail” of forks, pull requests, and merges,
> it should be more efficient to resolve such disagreements.
>
This sounds like a solution in search of a problem. Can you point to
incidents in this working group that would motivate the need for
something that diverges from the formal W3C policy?
--
Adam Roach
Principal Platform Engineer
abr@mozilla.com
+1 650 903 0800 x863