W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > May 2015

Re: Charter task force - list of volunteers

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 23:21:26 +0200
Message-ID: <555CFAD6.4000106@w3.org>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Erik Lagerway <erik@hookflash.com>
CC: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
On 20/05/2015 19:15, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>     Decision Policy
>     As explained in the Process Document ( section 3.3 ), this group
>     will seek to make decisions when there is consensus. When the Chair
>     puts a question and observes dissent, after due consideration of
>     different opinions, the Chair should record a decision (possibly
>     after a formal vote) and any objections, and move on.
> This seems to paraphrase the W3C process see
> http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#Consensus).
> I would prefer to simply remove this text and point to the process,
> rather than trying to figure out
> whether there is a conflict.

Note that this text is already in our current charter.

>     Editors are responsible for reflecting the consensus from the
>     Working Group in the specifications; where editors bring technical
>     solutions in the specifications that have not been reviewed by the
>     group, these solutions are annotated to reflect their status.
> I don't really understand the clause after the semicolon. Can you expand
> on what this
> is intended to mean?

Some groups operate under a work mode where editors are defining specs 
on their own, and unless someone complains, the stuff is assumed to have 
consensus. This works well in cases where the complexity or the stakes 
around a given spec aren't very high. The intent here is to make it 
clear that the WebRTC WG is not operating under such a mode.

Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 21:21:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:44 UTC