15:57:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
15:57:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-irc
15:57:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:57:25 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #w3process
15:57:27 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
15:57:27 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
15:57:28 <trackbot> Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference
15:57:28 <trackbot> Date: 19 February 2014
15:57:33 <koalie> Zakim, this will be chap7
15:57:34 <Zakim> ok, koalie; I see Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
15:58:13 <koalie> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Feb/0004.html Minutes and summary of 3 February 2014 Chapter 7 Revision Task Force teleconference
15:58:27 <koalie> s/<koalie> ->/<koaliie> ->/G
15:58:37 <Zakim> Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM has now started
15:58:38 <koalie> scribe: CoralieMercier
15:58:41 <koalie> scribenick: koalie
15:58:50 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process
16:01:52 <koalie> Zakim, who's on the call?
16:01:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
16:02:03 <jeff> zakim, this is Chapter 7
16:02:04 <Zakim> sorry, jeff, I do not see a conference named 'Chapter 7' in progress or scheduled at this time
16:02:08 <koalie> Zakim, this is chap7
16:02:08 <Zakim> koalie, this was already Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM
16:02:10 <Zakim> ok, koalie; that matches Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM
16:02:21 <koalie> Zakim, who's on the call?
16:02:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
16:02:31 <jeff> zakim, why do you not see me on the call?
16:02:31 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, jeff.
16:02:45 <jeff> I don't understand your answer, Zakim.
16:05:08 <koalie> ack me
16:05:41 <koalie> Zakim, Jeff is here
16:05:41 <Zakim> sorry, koalie, I do not recognize a party named 'Jeff'
16:08:05 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #w3process
16:08:26 <koalie> [chaals has audio only]
16:08:47 <koalie> Jeff: purpposes of the call today
16:08:56 <Ralph> [Ralph: regrets -- conflicting meeting]
16:08:58 <Ralph> Ralph has left #w3process
16:09:05 <koalie> ... We want to have a TF report to the AB for the F2F meeting on March 4-5
16:09:19 <koalie> regrets: Ralph
16:09:34 <koalie> Jeff: In order to issue a second last call of the document
16:09:39 <koalie> ... We should agree on that.
16:09:54 <koalie> ... Also there are a bunch of issues that chaals has addressed and are pending review
16:10:00 <koalie> ... Are we comfortable closing them all?
16:10:36 <koalie> ... From the TF today (Mike, Chaals and myself), are we comfortable with closing the issues?
16:10:52 <koalie> ... I haven't seen complains from others in the TF
16:11:24 <koalie> ... re: my issues with Revising CR and revising PR, chaals revised that but I am not yet convinced
16:11:30 <koalie> chaals: I saw your e-mail
16:11:43 <koalie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Feb/0055.html
16:12:36 <koalie> chaals: There are 2 issues
16:12:45 <koalie> ... revising CRs and publishing revised CRs
16:12:51 <koalie> ... you pointed an issue that is valid
16:12:58 <koalie> ... and wondered if two sections are necessary
16:13:02 <koalie> ... Ian asked the same question
16:13:05 <koalie> ... I think we do
16:13:11 <koalie> ... this was a piece of issue-59
16:13:14 <koalie> issue-59?
16:13:14 <trackbot> issue-59 -- The 24-Oct-2013 Draft of Ch7 has some organizational issues and readability suffers -- closed
16:13:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/59
16:13:21 <koalie> Chaals: Fantasai raised issue-59
16:13:30 <koalie> ... the process is very similar but is not the same
16:13:46 <koalie> ... so it's useful to know what it takes to know how to publish a revised CR
16:14:19 <koalie> Jeff: If you have them in separate sections, I think we need to be really laborious and add what the Director needs to do and etc.
16:14:35 <koalie> ... I wouldn't object, if that were you editorial decision, but it would have to be complete
16:14:42 <koalie> chaals: That would be my editorial decision
16:14:57 <koalie> ... The review is ongoing, we would have to say the document exists
16:15:07 <koalie> Jeff: Another question
16:15:19 <koalie> ... Would publishing a revised CR also trigger an addition CfE?
16:15:27 <koalie> chaals: It typically does, it's addressed in the draft.
16:15:52 <koalie> ... Beyond removing things at risk, you're likely to trigger a CfE, hence you need the Director's decision.
16:16:19 <koalie> Jeff: This is why I think the lack of parallel instruction is problematic
16:16:41 <koalie> ... If it's covered by the Patent Policy, you @@ it's informative
16:16:56 <koalie> chaals: It's a normative patent requirement
16:17:00 <koalie> ... I'll continue that
16:17:13 <koalie> Jeff: I'm fine with this in 7.4, but not in 7.4.1
16:17:48 <koalie> chaals: I'm not sure what's missing
16:17:56 <koalie> Jeff: the lack of parallel instructions is confusing
16:18:04 <koalie> ... In 7.1 you have a declarative statement
16:18:18 <koalie> ... in 7.4.1 it's part of a discussion.
16:18:26 <koalie> chaals: It doesn't create a CfE
16:18:37 <koalie> ... formally that call belongs to the team contact who's supposed to make the call
16:18:59 <koalie> ... it's not necessarily the case that even with substantive changes a revised CR will trigger a CfE
16:19:05 <koalie> ... would you like this statement to be stronger?
16:19:11 <koalie> ... What statement would you like?
16:19:19 <koalie> Jeff: I don't know; totally confused now.
16:19:47 <koalie> ... In 7.4.1, the reason you're explaining why we need a revised CR is a trigger of CfE
16:20:05 <koalie> ... and now you're tellinig me it doesn't necessarily.
16:20:31 <koalie> chaals: We could copy and paste the text from the Patent Policy; Ian's preference is refer and link.
16:21:14 <koalie> Jeff: the text says if there are substantive changes made, you need a director's decision to publish a revision because this will be an exclusion opportunity.
16:21:31 <koalie> ... and if it might not?
16:22:00 <koalie> chaals: Section 4 of the patent policy describes this. @@@@ missed the start of point.
16:22:40 <koalie> Jeff: I'll leave it up to your editorial decision if you can find a way toclarify this
16:23:40 <koalie> ACTION: chaals to amend 7.4.1 to add actions that need to be taken upon revising a CR including the requirement that the Diretors announces publication to W3C groups and the public.
16:23:40 <trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Amend 7.4.1 to add actions that need to be taken upon revising a cr including the requirement that the diretors announces publication to w3c groups and the public. [on Charles McCathie Nevile - due 2014-02-26].
16:24:10 <Zakim> restarting zakim-bot in 3 minutes to recover bridge state; please save your agendas
16:24:22 <koalie> Jeff: Did you see my confusion about 7.5
16:24:40 <koalie> chaals: To get from CR to PR, it's ok to publish with features at risk
16:25:11 <koalie> ... WG may remove features at risk in CR w/out republishing a revised CR
16:25:30 <koalie> Jeff: Why is that bullet in 7.5, it is in 7.4 and 7.4.1
16:25:57 <koalie> chaals: You can do it in CR, it's the practice
16:26:16 <koalie> Mike: It seems we're keeping PR in its form
16:26:28 <koalie> ... in the new process PR was just a 30-day warning on AC review
16:26:36 <koalie> chaals: This is analogous to revising a CR
16:27:07 <koalie> ... the practice is if it's the last revision of CR, you won't publish an updated CR if you publish a PR the next day
16:27:17 <koalie> ... PR is basically carved in stone.
16:27:38 <koalie> ... In the transition, the one class of substantive chage allowed is drop things that were already marked at risk
16:27:39 <Zakim> zakim-bot restarting
16:27:50 <koalie> ... It's not a full blown PR @@@
16:28:10 <koalie> ... You don't have to publish a CR and a PR to @@@@
16:28:14 <koalie> Mike: I understand
16:28:19 <koalie> Jeff: There are other changes as well
16:28:52 <koalie> ... I don't mind that we reintroduce PR, but it's different in CR
16:29:22 <koalie> Mike: What we came up with is not dramatically simpler than the current process.
16:29:40 <koalie> ... major innovation of allowing AC review much earlier in the process
16:30:25 <koalie> Jeff: The 4th bullet of 7.5 PR [Jeff reads]
16:30:40 <koalie> ... CR review hasn't possibly closed when we enter PR
16:30:55 <koalie> chaals: Yes. CR reviews are defined.
16:31:27 <koalie> Jeff: Is that different from the AC review?
16:31:29 <koalie> chaals: Yes
16:31:38 <koalie> Mike: what's the difference then?
16:31:44 <koalie> chaals: They're different reviews
16:31:54 <koalie> ... 7.4 CR has a deadline for comments
16:31:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #w3process
16:32:02 <koalie> ... you might accept late comments for some reasons
16:32:17 <Ralph> Ralph has joined #w3process
16:32:23 <Ralph> zakim, this is chap7
16:32:23 <Zakim> ok, Ralph; that matches Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM
16:32:27 <koalie> ... this happens in reality but not frequently
16:32:27 <Ralph> zakim, who's on the phone?
16:32:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jeff, koalie, Mike_Champion, Chaals
16:32:32 <Ralph> Ralph has left #w3process
16:33:43 <koalie> chaals: either you fix spec or convice Tim you don't need to address
16:34:16 <koalie> Mike: The existing process says you can get around for 5 months, and this is what we're trying to address
16:34:24 <koalie> ... in 5 months the world has moved on
16:34:33 <koalie> ... look at the shadow Dom kerfuffle
16:34:37 <koalie> s/Dom/DOM
16:35:53 <koalie> chaals: This requirement ensures a decision is based on each comment received
16:36:02 <koalie> Mike: You've convinced me, thank you.
16:36:13 <koalie> ------
16:36:21 <koalie> Jeff: Mike, any other concern?
16:36:45 <koalie> Mike: I'm mildly dissatisfied with the way we put one sentence in the intro that new steps can be added in the chartering process
16:36:52 <koalie> ... Chap7 doesn't talk about chartering
16:36:58 <koalie> ... When do we address the rest of the Process?
16:37:11 <koalie> ... This round is focused only about Chap7?
16:37:33 <koalie> Mike: bottom of 7.1 as I recall
16:37:45 <koalie> ... That was in response to complains by Paul and I
16:37:56 <koalie> ... I wonder if it's sufficient genuflexion to their concerns
16:38:06 <koalie> Jeff: They wanted to adopt tighter processes?
16:38:26 <koalie> chaals: So long as it doesn't conflict with the Process, go for it
16:38:51 <koalie> ... Will we address things outside Chap7? Jeff said no, focus is on Chap7 for now.
16:39:01 <koalie> ... I'm ready to make proposals for those
16:39:12 <koalie> ... but we need to finish Chap 7 first.
16:39:25 <koalie> Jeff: I don't understand what Paul's comment have to do with Chapter 7
16:39:46 <koalie> chaals: Half-fixed. We ruled out of scope for Chapter 7.
16:40:09 <koalie> Mike: Paul's problem is that for major cat-herding like HTML and TP, LC is a valuable mechanism
16:40:28 <koalie> ... in Shenzhen, Paul proposed LC is optional
16:40:56 <koalie> ... Our proposal to make is explicit that WG can update their charters to meet certain needs
16:41:12 <koalie> ... Perhaps an extra sentence to explain might be appropriate.
16:41:35 <koalie> Jeff: I'd use this as a Chapter 7 issue. If the community wanted to have spelled out
16:41:48 <koalie> ... that there's a concept of LC
16:41:58 <koalie> ... and this is how it works, and this is optional,
16:42:09 <koalie> ... that would be in chapter 7, not in chapter 5
16:42:44 <koalie> ... I don't accept that the restriction from the Team is that we're only doing Chapter 7.
16:43:01 <koalie> ... My impression overall was that the community had rejected that requirement.
16:43:04 <koalie> Mike: I agree
16:43:30 <koalie> ... I'm happy to tell Paul to move on
16:43:43 <koalie> chaals: Paul can chime in at last call
16:44:12 <Zakim> +fantasai
16:44:22 <koalie> [fantasai arrives]
16:44:35 <koalie> Mike: It might be worth to add to the sentence and provide background.
16:44:46 <koalie> ... It would be a small change that could address Paul's question
16:44:49 <koalie> RRSagent, make minutes
16:44:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-minutes.html koalie
16:45:10 <koalie> Jeff: I'd suggest you write again to Paul that the current consensus is to address the issue with this sentence,
16:45:28 <koalie> ... that it's going to AB approval, and that he should speak soon lest it's too late to raise it again.
16:48:07 <koalie> regrets+ SteveZ
16:48:25 <koalie> chair: Jeff
16:49:21 <koalie> fantasai: From the last time I looked, main concerned I had was not understanding why a group would ship CR, since it's easier to keep in WD form
16:49:33 <koalie> ... CR is a signal to the world in the current Process
16:50:13 <koalie> chaals: We introduced a section on revising CR
16:51:08 <koalie> ... to back-up fantasai's comment,
16:51:25 <koalie> ... Bar for revision is higher. Assumption you want to get to Rec.
16:51:36 <koalie> ... You go to CR because you want to go to Rec
16:51:54 <koalie> ... You don't want to be revising and revising CR
16:52:46 <koalie> ... You're not speculating. Some groups will.
16:53:12 <koalie> fantasai: in CSS WG we use CR as the sigal that the spec is stabilizing.
16:53:24 <koalie> s/sigal/signal to the wider community/
16:54:49 <koalie> fantasai: I haven't looked enough to make further intelligent comments
16:55:27 <koalie> Jeff: Now, even after we say we're done, it will go for AC review
16:55:41 <koalie> ... and there will be opportunity to go back
16:55:54 <koalie> ... Do we need to meet again before the AB meeting?
16:55:56 <sgalineau> sgalineau has joined #w3process
16:56:12 <koalie> chaals: I'd send a call for consensus about the resolved issues
16:56:36 <koalie> ... and in a week, I'd send declare consensus and call the issues
16:56:58 <koalie> s/resolved/proposed reolutions for/
16:57:07 <koalie> Jeff: OK, I'll wait till you push a draft tonight
16:57:15 <koalie> ... and send a call for consensus tomorrow.
16:57:35 <koalie> s/reol/resol/
16:57:55 <koalie> Jeff: Any other comment? question? before we ajourn for today?
16:57:57 <koalie> [none]
16:58:03 <koalie> Jeff: Thanks all
16:58:10 <Zakim> -Mike_Champion
16:58:15 <koalie> ... Next actual conversation will take place at the AB f2f
16:58:22 <koalie> ... fantasai, it is on the West Coast
16:58:35 <koalie> ... if you would like to join, I invite you as a member of this TF
16:59:05 <koalie> ... Tuesday Mar 4 at 8:30 am in SFO
16:59:07 <Zakim> -Jeff
16:59:11 <Zakim> -fantasai
16:59:12 <Zakim> -Chaals
16:59:17 <koalie> fantasai: I can't object to the time and location. Thanks.
16:59:23 <koalie> [adjourned]
16:59:26 <koalie> Zakim, drop me
16:59:27 <Zakim> koalie is being disconnected
16:59:27 <Zakim> Team_JEFF(CHAP7)11:00AM has ended
16:59:27 <Zakim> Attendees were Jeff, koalie, Mike_Champion, Chaals, fantasai
16:59:29 <fantasai> s/SFO/SF/
17:00:10 <koalie> RRSagent, make minutes
17:00:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-minutes.html koalie
17:47:07 <jeff_> jeff_ has joined #w3process
18:02:26 <fantasai> i/chair: Jeff/chaals: Last Call means many things to many people.
18:02:26 <fantasai> chaals: To a11y, means forcing group to address a11y issues before going to CR.
18:02:29 <fantasai> chaals: To some other groups, means "we think we're done, want to make sure".
18:02:29 <fantasai>  /
18:02:31 <fantasai> chaals: To HTML, means "please review this document".
18:02:34 <fantasai> chaals: Point of not having LC is to not have all these differing interpretations.
18:02:44 <koalie> fantasai, I'm editing locally now
18:02:58 <fantasai> koalie: thanks!
18:03:10 <koalie> I'll cram in your edits above
18:03:12 <fantasai> :)
18:03:39 <koalie> not sure exactly where however
18:05:48 <koalie> I'll insert those before your quote
18:07:04 <koalie> done
18:09:23 <koalie> fantasai, see above http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-minutes.html#item01
18:09:27 <koalie> RRSAgent, bye
18:09:27 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-actions.rdf :
18:09:27 <RRSAgent> ACTION: chaals to amend 7.4.1 to add actions that need to be taken upon revising a CR including the requirement that the Diretors announces publication to W3C groups and the public. [1]
18:09:27 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/19-w3process-irc#T16-23-40
18:09:30 <koalie> Zakim, bye
18:09:30 <Zakim> Zakim has left #w3process