13:58:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
13:58:04 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-irc
13:58:06 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:58:06 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #w3process
13:58:08 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be Process
13:58:08 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:09 <trackbot> Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference
13:58:09 <trackbot> Date: 31 March 2015
13:59:31 <Zakim> AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM has now started
13:59:38 <Zakim> +SteveZ
14:01:58 <Zakim> +Mike_Champion
14:02:49 <Zakim> +??P0
14:04:17 <Zakim> -??P0
14:04:53 <SteveZ> Zakim,who is on phone?
14:04:53 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, SteveZ.
14:06:24 <Zakim> -SteveZ
14:06:58 <SteveZ> SteveZ has joined #w3process
14:07:04 <Zakim> +SteveZ
14:08:27 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process
14:08:38 <Zakim> +Jeff
14:08:39 <SteveZ> Zakim, who is making noise?
14:08:54 <Zakim> SteveZ, listening for 14 seconds I heard sound from the following: SteveZ (57%), Jeff (14%)
14:11:30 <Zakim> +??P2
14:11:35 <timeless> Zakim, ??p2 is me
14:11:35 <Zakim> +timeless; got it
14:11:48 <timeless> Zakim, mute me
14:11:48 <Zakim> timeless should now be muted
14:11:51 <timeless> scribe: timeless
14:12:20 <timeless> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/0138.html
14:12:49 <timeless> Topic: Plan for next steps
14:13:13 <timeless> jeff: i thought chaals was going to formally object to...
14:13:24 <timeless> SteveZ: he was going to formally object to changing the rules for TAG
14:13:47 <timeless> ... he put out a proposal for the TAG that he would support
14:13:59 <timeless> ... but it was a way bigger change than what we were trying to do in this time
14:14:12 <timeless> ... his proposal was expanding the TAG w/ an extra three members, and some other things
14:14:22 <timeless> ... ArtB supported it
14:14:39 <timeless> jeff: do we have a formal questionnaire that's open?
14:14:46 <timeless> SteveZ: no, we just asked for email comments
14:14:58 <timeless> jeff: so maybe his comments are a formal objection
14:15:09 <timeless> mike: it might be useful to talk to the Director whomever this might be
14:15:23 <timeless> ... to get a sense of whether a Formal Objection would block this new process from becoming official
14:15:36 <timeless> jeff: as a Content or Process Question?
14:15:48 <timeless> mike: a Process question
14:16:02 <timeless> ... for how we'd handle what amounts to an attempt for a formal objection
14:16:10 <timeless> ... we could ask the Director if this FO would be upheld
14:16:17 <timeless> ... i'd hope the answer would be no
14:16:28 <timeless> jeff: i'm pretty sure the answer would be that he wouldn't know until he looks
14:16:39 <timeless> ... usually if there's a FO, they ask people to try to work it out
14:16:52 <timeless> ... failing that, he'd rule on the FO
14:16:57 <timeless> mike: ok, that makes sense
14:17:18 <timeless> ... so this is chaals putting an idea on the table
14:17:28 <timeless> jeff: i guess it'd be useful if we could look at the thread
14:18:22 <timeless> SteveZ: i believe the thread was on process
14:20:46 <timeless> jeff: some review comments from Mark Nottingham
14:21:12 <timeless> jeff: his comments wouldn't block
14:21:29 <timeless> ... an AB/TAG -- chair resign request -- too much power
14:21:41 <timeless> ... some conflict between two mostly unused sections of voting
14:21:44 <timeless> ... and editorial
14:22:12 <timeless> SteveZ: i think we could probably accept the second one
14:22:17 <timeless> Zakim, unmute me
14:22:17 <Zakim> timeless should no longer be muted
14:23:18 <jeff> Some Chaals comments --> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/att-0101/00-part
14:25:45 <timeless> jeff: i think we need chaals to know if there's another proposal he'd accept
14:25:54 <timeless> mike: no member has indicated support for his proposal
14:26:14 <timeless> SteveZ: but per jeff's note, we should ask him if he'd accept other proposals
14:26:19 <timeless> s/jeff:/SteveZ:/
14:26:27 <timeless> jeff: we should decide what we want to do
14:26:48 <timeless> ... unless he can come up w/ a suggested compromise, it sounds like we have a consensus to go forward w/ the current text
14:26:52 <timeless> mike: I agree with that
14:26:57 <timeless> SteveZ: i do too
14:27:25 <timeless> jeff: on wayne's stuff, there was a lot of agreement to take on the Appeals issue in Process 2016
14:27:35 <Zakim> +dsinger
14:27:36 <timeless> ... but i feel like there was no consensus to take it on in 2015
14:27:52 <timeless> SteveZ: there were a bunch of editorial things, which i think chaals has accepted
14:28:14 <timeless> ... we're talking about next steps, as the comment period is about to expire tomorrow
14:28:22 <timeless> dsinger: have we gotten comments
14:28:42 <timeless> SteveZ: we've gotten comments from Wayne, Mark Nottingham, Chaals,
14:28:59 <timeless> dsinger: it'd be useful to put together a note for the AC of what comments we've gotten
14:29:13 <jeff> s/dsinger/jeff/
14:29:22 <timeless> jeff: it'd be good for the chair to write  a Disposition of Comments
14:29:53 <timeless> mike: you can send it to the w3process list, and someone can send it to the AC list
14:30:16 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:30:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:30:37 <timeless> SteveZ: the issue of whether the TAG should be changed in a broader sense is still open
14:31:00 <timeless> mike: but it isn't a question for this year
14:31:10 <timeless> jeff: the deadline is today, it's already tomorrow in Japan
14:31:21 <timeless> mike: it's an informal deadline
14:32:16 <timeless> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:32:21 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:32:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:32:26 <timeless> chair: SteveZ
14:32:49 <timeless> topic: Identifying out of date specifications
14:33:02 <timeless> SteveZ: there was a discussion
14:33:12 <timeless> ... a proposal that we change the style sheets for out of date specifications
14:33:21 <timeless> ... to put up a notice to say that this specification is out of date
14:33:26 <timeless> ... (using CSS)
14:33:37 <timeless> ... indicating to check the current specification link to find the up to date copy
14:33:40 <timeless> ... it seems like this is now in the team's hands
14:33:49 <timeless> SteveZ: it seems like this is now in the team's hands
14:34:01 <timeless> SteveZ: it seems like this is now in the TEAM's hands
14:34:15 <timeless> SteveZ: it seems like this is now in ... hands
14:34:32 <timeless> jeff: is there a concrete proposal?
14:34:39 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:34:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:35:15 <timeless> dsinger: the proposal is that if the head of the document is different from the published document
14:35:24 <timeless> ... or if there's a major rev change
14:35:35 <timeless> jeff: why is this a sys team thing instead of the WG?
14:35:54 <timeless> mike: historical documents, someone has to do it, the WGs don't necessarily exist
14:36:01 <timeless> jeff: we need a procedure going forward
14:36:09 <timeless> ... and we need a one time effort to catch up on history
14:36:11 <timeless> mike: i agree
14:36:16 <timeless> jeff: that makes sense to me
14:36:20 <timeless> s/ ... it seems like this is now in ... hands//
14:36:25 <timeless> s/ ... it seems like this is now in the TEAM's hands//
14:36:31 <timeless> s/... it seems like this is now in ... hands//
14:36:34 <timeless> s/... it seems like this is now in the TEAM's hands//
14:36:46 <timeless> s/... it seems like this is now in the team's hands//
14:37:02 <timeless> jeff: do we want to put into the Process that WGs should do tihs?
14:37:06 <timeless> s/tihs/this/
14:37:12 <timeless> mike: isn't it more of a Pub Rules things?
14:37:27 <Dsinger_> Dsinger_ has joined #w3process
14:37:30 <timeless> jeff: Team owns Pub Rules, but WGs own their interaction w/ Pub Rules
14:37:41 <timeless> ... i'd hope action is done where there's knowledge to do the work
14:38:10 <timeless> ... "following these new proposed Pub Rules", they'd send both their new document for Director Approval, and their doctoring of the old document
14:38:19 <timeless> Dsinger_: i thought the header of the document was autogenerated
14:38:40 <timeless> ... if we make the stylesheet change, i think the WGs will be quite keen to do whatever it takes to trigger it
14:38:49 <timeless> SteveZ: only the Team can update historical document stylesheets
14:38:56 <timeless> ... right now, the WG can't do it per process
14:39:08 <timeless> jeff: ok, then i need this new procedure to have the WG inform the team when it should happen
14:39:29 <timeless> ... i don't want to be in a position to have someone in Sys Team figure out that a WG obsoleted something
14:39:44 <timeless> ... the WG should inform Sys Team that we need to update the header on the now obsoleted document
14:39:45 <Dsinger_> Someone works that out today. This is not process, can we take it offline?
14:39:55 <timeless> SteveZ: when they publish a new version, it obsoletes an old version
14:40:04 <timeless> ... so pushing the publish button would be the notification
14:40:11 <timeless> ... i don't know that's the only time
14:40:17 <timeless> s/.../jeff:/
14:40:29 <timeless> mike: this isn't a change to W3C Process
14:40:34 <timeless> ... it's a detail of W3 Team
14:40:48 <timeless> ... that's why i wanted someone from Team to weigh in on the easiest way for them to address this
14:40:51 <timeless> jeff: i agree with you
14:40:57 <timeless> ... let's have someone write up the proposal
14:41:03 <timeless> ... so i can take it to the Sys Team
14:41:04 <Dsinger_> Volunteers
14:41:11 <Dsinger_> Q+
14:41:15 <timeless> ... my proposal is that included in the proposal shouldn't only be the new style sheet
14:41:22 <Dsinger_> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html
14:41:26 <timeless> ... but also the triggers that would cause the need for the style sheet
14:42:05 <timeless> SteveZ: it seems useful to take the vague process to Sys Team and ask them "what information would you like from a WG to decide to be able to implement that"
14:42:15 <timeless> ... we can make suggestions of how it should be done, but they may have a better idea
14:42:22 <timeless> Dsinger_: if you have a look at the DNT document
14:42:44 <timeless> This version:
14:42:44 <timeless> Latest published version:
14:42:44 <timeless> Latest editor's draft:
14:42:44 <timeless> Editors:
14:42:52 <timeless> Dsinger_: i didn't write these lines
14:43:07 <timeless> ... it'd make sense for something to be able to automatically adjust lines like them
14:43:15 <timeless> Dsinger_: i'll write this up
14:43:20 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:43:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:43:39 <timeless> s|s/ //||
14:43:41 <timeless> s|s/ //||
14:43:56 <timeless> topic: Summarize status of Wayne Carr's Comment 9
14:44:13 <Dsinger_> Which was Wayne #9?
14:44:14 <timeless> SteveZ: i believe Wayne agreed that this wasn't a simple thing to fix
14:44:35 <timeless> i|was|-> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/0106.html Wayne's comment 9|
14:45:11 <timeless> jeff: i thought it was a good job of identifying inconsistency
14:45:24 <timeless> ... i thought it would be interesting if we had a conversation of the problem we're trying to solve
14:45:28 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:45:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:45:43 <Dsinger_> Yes, it is not a fire and there are alligators potentially lurking in the swamp
14:46:36 <timeless> topic: Continue review Wayne Carr's Comments on the Process 2015 draft out for Review
14:46:43 <timeless> SteveZ: on Wayne's other comments
14:46:53 <timeless> i|on|-> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/0023.html Wayne's other comments|
14:47:33 <timeless> SteveZ: on AC's something on something
14:47:39 <timeless> ... i think we decided in the minutes
14:47:55 <timeless> ... the Errata discussion hasn't produced any discussion
14:48:02 <timeless> ... we're still left in the air w/ the issue of whether
14:48:09 <timeless> ... we can do changes w/o requiring an AC review
14:48:20 <timeless> ... are there any things that are truly editorial
14:48:31 <timeless> ... Wayne listed some of those
14:48:45 <timeless> ... i'm not sure how to get useful discussion beyond the AC meeting itself
14:48:59 <timeless> jeff: we agree that purely editorial discussions don't require AC review
14:49:09 <timeless> ... we just don't agree whether editorial changes is the empty set
14:49:17 <timeless> ... it seems the language we have is fine
14:49:41 <timeless> ... if it turns out that there is no such thing as an editorial change, then the clause will never be utilized
14:49:58 <timeless> SteveZ: the document today says even editorial changes require AC review
14:50:09 <timeless> ... i'm willing to draft a proposed resolution
14:50:28 <timeless> jeff: changing "MAY" to "may" could be editorial
14:50:34 <timeless> ... perhaps that's an existence proof
14:50:40 <timeless> SteveZ: Wayne had some examples
14:50:45 <timeless> ... i believe the set is not empty
14:51:07 <timeless> jeff: does anyone object to fantasai's proposal that purely editorial changes don't require AC review?
14:51:13 <timeless> SteveZ: that would resolve the issue
14:51:21 <timeless> ... let me write that up and send it out as our proposed resolution
14:51:27 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:51:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:52:00 <timeless> dsinger: tricky, question is, what if a WG decides something is purely editorial, and AC disagrees?
14:52:02 <Dsinger_> Dsinger_ has joined #w3process
14:52:10 <timeless> jeff: i think that's a reasonable question
14:52:22 <timeless> ... i think it could go out to the AC w/ a 4 week window
14:52:34 <timeless> Dsinger_: but as chaals pointed out, you might as well put it up for AC review
14:52:43 <timeless> ... because it's the same amount of time
14:52:51 <timeless> jeff: so, how does someone object given time?
14:53:00 <timeless> Dsinger_: i think we should leave it as a hanging question and move on
14:53:12 <timeless> jeff: chaals's point
14:53:30 <timeless> jeff: well, a number of decisions, an Announcement of a Memorandum of Understanding w/ another Organization
14:53:47 <timeless> ... it goes out for a 4 week comment, which can be appealed, and if no one comments, then after 4 weeks, it's approved
14:53:54 <timeless> ... using that process, no one has to ballot the changes
14:54:02 <timeless> ... so i'm not sure i agree w/ chaals that it's the same thing
14:54:25 <timeless> Dsinger_: i think the WG members are the only people who could know they believe it's editorial
14:54:38 <timeless> jeff: they could have already left W3C
14:54:58 <timeless> Dsinger_: so we could require no dissent instead of consensus
14:55:16 <timeless> jeff: it may broaden their commitment instead of
14:55:26 <timeless> Dsinger_: then it will go to court, and they'll win
14:55:41 <timeless> SteveZ: they're only on the hook for the last draft as a member
14:55:52 <jeff> +1 to Dave
14:55:52 <timeless> [ Scribe note: not precisely, but close enough ]
14:56:09 <timeless> Dsinger_: i think the only AC Members who could object would be ACs who are members of the WGs
14:56:27 <timeless> SteveZ: your point is that the decision to make an editorial change should be Without Opposition in the WG
14:56:31 <timeless> ... that makes sense to me
14:56:34 <timeless> timeless: +1
14:56:42 <Dsinger_> Ie better than consensus, no opposition
14:56:54 <timeless> Topic: Next
14:57:00 <Zakim> -Mike_Champion
14:57:02 <timeless> SteveZ: i need to develop a Disposition of Comments
14:57:22 <timeless> ... comment period officially closes today, but any comments received this week will be considered
14:57:40 <timeless> timeless: Passover next week, I'll be on vacation
14:58:04 <timeless> s/... it seems like this is now in ... hands//
14:58:11 <timeless> SteveZ: thanks everyone
14:58:16 <timeless> ... we'll talk next week
14:58:19 <timeless> [ Adjourned ]
14:58:22 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:58:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
14:58:22 <Zakim> -dsinger
14:58:24 <Zakim> -Jeff
14:58:37 <Zakim> -SteveZ
14:58:38 <Dsinger_> Dsinger_ has left #w3process
14:58:58 <timeless> s|s/... it seems like this is now in ... hands//||
14:59:15 <timeless> s/SteveZ: it seems like this is now in ... hands//
14:59:22 <timeless> s/SteveZ: it seems like this is now in the TEAM's hands//
14:59:28 <timeless> s/SteveZ: it seems like this is now in the team's hands//
14:59:31 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:59:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:00:28 <timeless> s/link to find the up to date copy/link to find the up to date copy ... it seems like this is now in the team's hands/
15:00:30 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:00:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:00:54 <timeless> s/Editors:/ Editors:/
15:00:56 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:00:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:01:22 <timeless> s/ Editors:/> Editors:/
15:01:26 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:01:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:01:49 <timeless> s/Latest editor's draft:/> Latest editor's draft:/
15:01:56 <timeless> s/Latest published version:/> Latest published version:/
15:02:02 <timeless> s/This version:/> This version:/
15:02:05 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:02:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:02:43 <timeless> s/Dsinger_/Dsinger/g
15:02:46 <timeless> s/dsinger/Dsinger/g
15:02:49 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:02:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:03:20 <timeless> RRSAgent, make minutes
15:03:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:03:29 <timeless> trackbot, end meeting
15:03:29 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:03:30 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been SteveZ, Mike_Champion, Jeff, timeless, dsinger
15:03:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:03:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-w3process-minutes.html trackbot
15:03:38 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:03:38 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
15:03:39 <Zakim> -timeless
15:03:39 <Zakim> AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM has ended