W3C and WSC process around concensus

As I'm sure you all remember, we are a W3C working group. If you are 
unfamiliar with W3C process and concensus, please read the following:

http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Consensus


For examples and discussions of straw polls, please read this and its 
replies:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/1997OctDec/0008.html


We will be working through the proposals for the rec track using these 
guidelines and processes. We'll start with the favicon related proposal in 
our next meeting, to get some easy decisions under our belt. We'll focus 
on the conformance language, since that is the core of a standard (which 
defines what it is to adhere to a standard), and all other text explains, 
motivates, or defends the conformance language. wsc-usecases provides 
background and explanation for how we'll proceed. 

Concensus will be recorded during meetings by the scribe. (Concensus in 
email discussions will be recorded by the declaration from the chair.) 

Anything we can't get concensus on (one way or another, or some other way 
entirely) we'll track in an Issue or Action Item, which will cite what 
additional steps we will take to attempt to achieve concensus or make 
progress. 


          Mez