David Singer
David Singer
I think the complexity of previous FOs need to be considered; they are not typically purely formal, rule-based, procedural. They are usually about what's right for the web and consortium,...
Process violations result in the team handling them, not FOs. Hard questions are … well, all the questions without an easy answer such as a rule in a process document....
Now I am lost. If you commit a Process Violation, it should be caught sooner than a Council, but if not, of course the Council should consider that in their...
No, FOs are not typically about the W3C Process. "This is outside the scope of w3C", "This is not in accordance with our values", "This presumes the answer to a...
I think our concerns may finally overlap. You're worried about the Council making up Process as we go along; we are concerned about Charters doing that, and specifically that the...
I doubt that we are going to completely disambiguate the meanings of: * independent * interoperable * implementation In this FO. They all have squishy areas. What we don't want...
Agreed, we need tighter mission, scope, and values – but they will never be tight enough to be unerringly diagnostic, there will always be judgment calls.
@nigelmegitt you might think "independent" is obvious, but in the session at TPAC we identified questions: how long ago can an open-source project have forked, for the two forks to...
@nigelmegitt my mistake…
If the team has a recommendation, the Council needs to, and will, hear it. Whether it's in the report, or they ask "well, what do you think?", the Council will...