15:20:49 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
15:20:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-irc
15:20:57 <jeff> zakim, code?
15:20:57 <Zakim> sorry, jeff, I don't know what conference this is
15:21:02 <jeff> zakim, this is process
15:21:02 <Zakim> ok, jeff; that matches AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM
15:21:09 <chaals> zakim, who is here?
15:21:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveZ, Jeff, Mike_Champion, [IPcaller]
15:21:11 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, jeff, chaals, mdjp, timeless, cwilso, trackbot
15:21:14 <chaals> zakim, [ip is me
15:21:14 <Zakim> +chaals; got it
15:21:33 <jeff> jeff: What in the world might we do in Process2016?
15:21:39 <jeff> ...anything worthwhile?
15:22:10 <jeff> ... I don't know anything important enough to pass muster; to make it worthwhile to do a rev of the process; except for possibly CGs.
15:22:26 <jeff> ... but I can't get my head around what we would actually say in the process about something which is not part of the process
15:22:48 <jeff> Mike: We might introduce some new process to characterize how some CGs exist in an orbit around WGs
15:23:03 <jeff> ... and what might IP commitment transitions look like
15:23:21 <jeff> All: But really it is Chaals who knows most about what should go into the process.
15:24:07 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:24:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:24:17 <timeless> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:24:19 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:24:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:24:21 <jeff> Steve: What are the 4-5 items you want to see in the Process2015 draft for the AC
15:24:30 <jeff> ..., chaals?
15:24:58 <jeff> Chaals: (1) Resigning from WG, (2) knowing if a WG has closed
15:25:18 <jeff> ... (3) significant proposal for TAG
15:25:20 <timeless> meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference
15:25:27 <jeff> ... as an AC rep I will object to current draft
15:25:41 <jeff> ... (4) Understand a WG decision (e.g. what the Chairs announce)
15:26:05 <jeff> Steve: I believe that the text for solving the default channel has reached consensus
15:26:15 <jeff> Chaals: Consensus, but no resolution.
15:26:55 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:26:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:26:57 <jeff> q+
15:27:23 <jeff> ... I don't like the proposal of a default approach.  Singer liked my approach.
15:27:44 <timeless> i/might we do in Process2016?/Topic: Process 2016 tasks/
15:27:50 <jeff> Steve: Singer was supportive that the announcement said where it was going.
15:29:50 <jeff> ack je
15:30:17 <jeff> Jeff: Suggest not having lots of open issues.
15:30:26 <jeff> Steve: Resigning: we can solve with simple text which proposed how one resigns.
15:30:37 <jeff> ... resign before Process2015 goes out.
15:31:18 <jeff> ... Knowing if a WG has closed should go off to Process2016
15:31:37 <jeff> Chaals: I understand that things not resolved will (unfortunately) go into 2016.
15:32:12 <jeff> Steve: TAG objection (two things from same organization) would not be in AC cover letter; Chaals will just object
15:32:43 <Zakim> +??P0
15:32:56 <jeff> Chaals: Defining a WG decision is for Process2016
15:32:58 <timeless> Zakim, ??p0 is me
15:32:58 <Zakim> +timeless; got it
15:33:41 <jeff> Mike: Isn't resign from a WG when you click the button to resign?
15:33:48 <jeff> Chaals: Doesn't say so in the process.
15:33:52 <jeff> ... should be easy to add
15:33:57 <jeff> ... I will happily do so.
15:34:06 <jeff> Mike: Making formal what is apparently the case
15:34:09 <jeff> ... +1
15:34:31 <timeless> scribe: timeless
15:34:36 <timeless> Zakim, mute me
15:34:36 <Zakim> timeless should now be muted
15:34:45 <chaals> issue-151?
15:34:45 <trackbot> issue-151 -- How to resign from a working group -- raised
15:34:45 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/151
15:34:48 <chaals> Proposed:
15:34:48 <chaals> 
15:34:48 <chaals> "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert, or equivalent action to formally leave the WG (e.g. through an automated join/leave system), the member's representatives will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group, effective immediately".
15:35:43 <timeless> chaals: you should be able to write the team contact
15:35:51 <timeless> ... saying you are resigning effective immediately
15:36:02 <timeless> Mike: why not mention the form
15:36:12 <timeless> chaals: if you tie the process to a thing that might go away
15:36:15 <timeless> ... things could break
15:36:34 <timeless> jeff: i think the team may establish additional details of how you do that
15:36:41 <timeless> ... maybe it should just say notify the team?
15:36:47 <chaals> s/jeff:/stevez:/
15:36:47 <jeff> s/jeff/steve/
15:37:00 <chaals> s/steve/jeff/
15:37:08 <timeless> ... "person resigns by written notification to the team"
15:37:17 <timeless> chaals: i'll add "to the team" to the proposed text
15:37:33 <timeless> jeff: i don't care how many ways you can resign
15:37:43 <timeless> ... you say "on written notification from an AC rep or IE"
15:37:51 <timeless> ... it doesn't say that the IE will have resigned
15:38:09 <timeless> q+ to ask if a Member wants a rep but not all Reps for a Member to resign...
15:38:12 <timeless> chaals: noted
15:38:19 <timeless> Zakim, ack me
15:38:19 <Zakim> unmuting timeless
15:38:20 <Zakim> timeless, you wanted to ask if a Member wants a rep but not all Reps for a Member to resign...
15:38:20 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
15:38:30 <chaals> Proposed:
15:38:30 <chaals> 
15:38:30 <chaals> "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert to the Team, or equivalent action to formally leave the WG (e.g. through an automated join/leave system), the member's representatives or invited expert will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group, effective immediately".
15:39:33 <timeless> chaals: resignation only applies to Member Entities, not representatives
15:39:48 <timeless> steve: if a member resigns, then all reps of the WG are deemed to have resigned
15:39:59 <timeless> chaals: members can remove all reps but retain membership
15:40:07 <timeless> mike: from the patent purpose, that matters
15:40:19 <timeless> steve: that's why we want to fix this
15:40:30 <timeless> jeff: if it's possible for a Member to be in a WG even if it has no Reps
15:40:40 <timeless> ... then i'm concerned about "equivalent actions to leave the working group"
15:40:54 <timeless> ... it could be interpreted that going from X reps to 0 reps would be leaving
15:41:08 <timeless> chaals: then you should instruct systems to ...
15:41:32 <timeless> jeff: the proposed resolution
15:41:42 <timeless> ... doesn't tie leaving the WG to the system
15:41:53 <timeless> ... it ties any action that's equivalent, and that isn't defined
15:42:07 <timeless> ... if the resolution ties to the existing system only, i think we're ok
15:42:15 <timeless> steve: why do we need the equivalent action clause?
15:42:27 <timeless> ... seems like the easiest way to fix this is to remove the equivalent action clause
15:42:47 <timeless> chaals: it's pretty trivial to have a button saying "i'm taking all members out and leaving the WG"
15:43:06 <timeless> mike: one employee in WG, employee leaves company, you're still in WG w/ no reps
15:43:31 <timeless> jeff: company later could say "we had one person in WG, he left company, therefore we had 0 people in WG, by his leaving company, we took equivalent action"
15:43:34 <timeless> mike: i agree
15:43:48 <timeless> ... i'm happy having the process document saying exactly what happens in WBS
15:43:57 <timeless> ... not worrying about corner case of deadline + WBS is down
15:44:04 <timeless> ... we've gone 20 years w/o worrying about it
15:44:19 <timeless> chaals: i've been impacted which is why i'm worried
15:44:25 <timeless> mike: let's not have a vague action
15:44:39 <timeless> jeff: "written notification to the team"
15:44:47 <timeless> mike: "electronic means written"
15:44:55 <timeless> jeff: we don't need to put that into the process
15:44:59 <timeless> Zakim, mute me
15:44:59 <Zakim> timeless should now be muted
15:45:06 <chaals> s/jeff:/steve:/
15:45:20 <timeless> steve: "using the form is accepted as written notification"
15:45:27 <timeless> jeff: that works for me
15:45:54 <timeless> chaals: seems backwards, but i probably would not object
15:46:09 <timeless> steve: a lot of places accept electronic statements as "written notification"
15:46:15 <timeless> chaals: you'd be defining "the form"?
15:46:25 <timeless> steve: we leave a lot of things to implementation
15:46:45 <timeless> chaals: i've lost the proposal
15:46:52 <timeless> steve: drop the "or equivalent
15:47:24 <chaals> Proposed:
15:47:24 <chaals> 
15:47:24 <chaals> "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert, the member's representatives or invited expert will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group, effective immediately".
15:47:49 <chaals> Proposed:
15:47:50 <chaals> 
15:47:50 <chaals> "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert, or equivalent action to formally leave the WG (e.g. through an automated join/leave system), the member and their representatives will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group".
15:48:07 <timeless> jeff: "effective immediately" is probably redundant, you could probably shorten it a bit
15:48:18 <timeless> ... you just put equivalent action back in
15:48:22 <timeless> chaals: copy-paste errors
15:48:40 <chaals> Proposed:
15:48:40 <chaals> 
15:48:40 <chaals> "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert the member and their representatives or invited expert will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group".
15:48:58 <timeless> Zakim, unmute me
15:48:58 <Zakim> timeless should no longer be muted
15:49:28 <timeless> timeless: wondering if their reps or _the_ IE ...
15:49:43 <timeless> jeff: makes sense
15:50:57 <timeless> [ Chaals reads a version w/ "the" as suggested by timeless ]
15:51:08 <timeless> steve: any objections?
15:51:12 <timeless> [ None ]
15:51:20 <timeless> RESOLUTION: Add "On written notification from an AC rep or invited expert the member and their representatives or the invited expert will be deemed to have resigned from the relevant Group".
15:51:30 <timeless> steve: default channel
15:51:34 <timeless> ... edited rec
15:51:36 <timeless> ... that one
15:51:42 <timeless> ... those are the only changes
15:51:55 <timeless> chaals: steve when you get back on line, can you send a formal resolution for the default one?
15:52:02 <timeless> steve: i'll issue a response to the CfC
15:52:10 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:52:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:52:19 <timeless> topic: ISSUE-152
15:52:34 <timeless> issue-152?
15:52:34 <trackbot> issue-152 -- Process2014 Regresses Editorial Revision of RECs -- open
15:52:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/152
15:52:48 <timeless> steve: are we trying to solve a case that has never occurred in practice?
15:53:04 <timeless> ... i conjectured that we've never done an Edited REC for solely Editorial changes
15:53:09 <timeless> chaals: i suggest you're wrong
15:53:14 <timeless> ... I believe RDFa is doing that
15:53:36 <timeless> steve: i discussed w/ jeff -- tantek's proposal
15:53:50 <timeless> ... and noted your (chaals's) slippery slope warning
15:53:58 <timeless> ... on circle/oval
15:54:09 <timeless> mike: i remember the discussion in tokyo that changed my mind
15:54:21 <timeless> ... the PAG example that was resolved by changing the name of something
15:54:31 <timeless> ... one would think that changing a name would be editorial
15:54:36 <timeless> ... but we have an example where it isn't
15:54:40 <timeless> ... i've changed my mind on this
15:54:49 <timeless> ... we have to tell fantasai that it's deliberate
15:54:59 <timeless> ... there's no way to define an editorial change that doesn't have patent implication
15:55:08 <timeless> steve: i can draft text for a note to go in
15:55:41 <timeless> ... that was the one issue that the AB asked be explicitly noted
15:56:02 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:56:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
15:56:12 <timeless> steve: i believe we have marching orders for the document going to AC
15:56:19 <timeless> ... we have updates on default channels + resigning
15:56:30 <timeless> ... and a note on not resolved for Edited REC
15:56:38 <timeless> ... those are the only proposed changes going into 2015
15:56:47 <timeless> ... the other issues are separate and likely to be 2016 issues
15:57:06 <timeless> ... i'll draft a note this weekend or before for a letter to the AC for a 4 week review of the proposed 2015 document
15:57:23 <timeless> chaals: i'd request that you draft some explicit explanation of the Edited REC issue
15:57:29 <timeless> steve: yes
15:57:40 <timeless> jeff: i think in your letter you should include the entire schedule going forward
15:57:51 <timeless> ... 4 week review, review comments to TF in April timeframe
15:58:00 <timeless> ... TF expects to turn around comments in April
15:58:10 <timeless> ... TF expects to get out final in time for AC meeting
15:58:17 <timeless> steve: that's my understanding, yes
15:58:28 <timeless> ... i agree it should be in there
15:58:38 <timeless> jeff: in the March 16 AB call
15:58:46 <timeless> ... i'm thinking to put on the agenda the question
15:59:02 <timeless> ... of whether there are sufficiently big further changes that we want to have a Process 2016 focus
15:59:13 <timeless> ... steve, if i have such an Agendum, would you like to join the AB meeting
15:59:16 <timeless> steve: yeah
15:59:24 <timeless> jeff: question for everyone, i could tee up that item
15:59:32 <timeless> ... or if someone else wants to take it up
15:59:51 <timeless> steve: i sent 2 lists to the AB+public-xxx prior to the Tokyo AB meeting
16:00:00 <timeless> ... (1) the list of still open issues (potentially 2016)
16:00:10 <timeless> ... (2) list of things i didn't think we part of the process
16:00:18 <timeless> ... slightly less  than a week before the Tokyo meeting
16:00:30 <timeless> ... we didn't have time to discuss that list
16:00:38 <timeless> ... but it could be helpful for March
16:00:41 <timeless> jeff: sure
16:00:49 <timeless> ... i'm not trying to collate the potential issues
16:01:02 <timeless> ... trying to argue that to make the investment, there has to be something big
16:01:11 <timeless> ... CGs look promising, but we'd have to figure out what to say
16:01:26 <timeless> steve: the list is a set of topics that are potentially big issues
16:01:34 <timeless> ... certainly the "is new charter a new WG" is a big issue
16:01:44 <timeless> jeff: a bunch of issues that PSIG have told us to stay clear of them
16:02:01 <timeless> ... i don't want to have Process 2016 just to go around in circles that won't conclude
16:02:10 <timeless> ... specifically don't want those
16:02:19 <timeless> steve: i think there are things worth doing
16:02:28 <timeless> jeff: if chaals / mike have framing for CG thing
16:02:33 <timeless> steve: thanks everyone
16:02:44 <timeless> i/thanks/topic: Conluding
16:02:50 <Zakim> -chaals
16:02:54 <timeless> ... i'll get the email out by Sunday
16:02:54 <Zakim> -Mike_Champion
16:03:15 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:03:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:03:15 <Zakim> -Jeff
16:03:28 <Zakim> -SteveZ
16:03:41 <timeless> i/might we do in Process2016/scribe: jeff/
16:03:50 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:03:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:05:24 <timeless> i/button to resign/topic: Members and IEs Resigning from WGs
16:06:38 <timeless> s/jeffz/stevez/
16:07:08 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:07:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:08:10 <timeless> s/topic: ISSUE-152/topic: ISSUE-152 Process2014 Regresses Editorial Revision of RECs
16:08:28 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, timeless, in AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM
16:08:29 <Zakim> AB_(PROCESS)10:00AM has ended
16:08:29 <Zakim> Attendees were SteveZ, Jeff, Mike_Champion, [IPcaller], chaals, timeless
16:09:02 <timeless> i/steve: default channel/topic: Noted changes for next AB Meeting/
16:09:55 <timeless> i/we have marching orders/topic: Plan of Action/
16:10:10 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:10:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:10:40 <timeless> [ Adjourned ]
16:15:40 <timeless> ok
16:15:43 <timeless> s/ok//
16:17:46 <timeless> s/for next AB Meeting/to be addressed in Process2015 prior to sending outo for AC review
16:17:51 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:17:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:25:27 <timeless> chair: Steve
16:25:36 <timeless> s/[IPcaller], //
16:26:06 <timeless> RRSAgent:
16:26:06 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand '', timeless.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:26:15 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:26:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:26:32 <timeless> s/RRSAgent://
16:27:01 <timeless> s/stevez:/SteveZ:/
16:27:05 <timeless> s/steve:/SteveZ:/g
16:27:07 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:27:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:28:03 <timeless> s/outo/out/
16:28:04 <timeless> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:28:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html timeless
16:28:27 <timeless> trackbot, end meeting
16:28:27 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:28:27 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:28:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:28:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/24-w3process-minutes.html trackbot
16:28:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:28:36 <RRSAgent> I see no action items