- From: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:39:27 -0700
- To: public-w3process@w3.org
On 2014-08-26 15:31, Wayne Carr wrote: > > On 2014-08-26 14:26, David Singer wrote: >> On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:58 , Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 8/19/14 8:59 AM, Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue >>> Tracker wrote: >>>> should we require an AC review or approval to extend a charter >>>> (sometimes, always, more than X amount of time)? >>> Seems like it would be mostly `make work` to have a formal AC review >>> if the length (of a WG's charter extension) is relatively short. As >>> such, a formal AC review of a charter extension should only be done >>> if the extension is on the long-ish side, say 6+ months. >> I also think we can trust that the staff will push back on repeated >> extensions without review. However, would it be prudent to have a >> suggestion at least that charters be formally reviewed once the >> extensions have got to a certain length (e.g. 1 year, 1.5 years)? > > Could just have a limit on total length of extensions. e.g. can > extend as long as the new termination date is no more than x months > after the approved charter's original termination. Just realized a limit isn't really necessary since the extension can be appealed (and undone) if the AC objects. > >> >> >> David Singer >> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc. >> >> >> >> > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2014 22:39:55 UTC