Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Telecon Wednesday

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 11:50 AM 5/23/2006 -0700, Cruikshank, David W wrote:
>With 7 voting members, I have had appologies from 3 of them for
>Wednesday's telecon.  How do we propose we approve the shift of the
>current spec to the W3C WG?

Well ... I think it can be handled in a number of ways.  I, as the OASIS 
rep to the WG, could submit it to the WG as comments.  That is probably the 
most lightweight procedure, if the TC approves of the package as a 
comment/contribution to the WG.

Btw, formally speaking, the spec is already in the W3C WG, and we [TC] are 
supposed to be more or less in retirement -- not editing it.  Along with 
proposed-changes.html, the accompanying "spec" is meant to illustrate 
precisely what we mean by each proposed change.  Since I am also the WG 
editor, I have done it in such a way that it is directly re-usable (I 
hope), if the WG agrees to the proposed changes.

>We may not even make a forum.

s/forum/quorum/

I don't know.  You could badger them to show up at least at the 
beginning.  Or to email you their vote ("yes, I like it, send it".)

They have been on notice for 2 weeks that this was coming.  (You know, 
participation isn't purely a tea-party or resume padder ... there are some 
responsibilities!)  Frankly, I get a little impatient with our little 
WebCGM community.

Alternately, you could conduct another sort of vote, than an official 
formal TC ballot.  Informal but archived email ballot, strawpoll, etc.

Pursuing that line of thinking, you could rule that a formal vote is not 
required, and take a straw poll.  I'm not sure what TC Process says for 
situations like this.  It is probably not spelled out like it is for CS 
vote, OS vote, etc.  So you probably have some lee-way (especially if the 
view is "unanimous").  People have had two weeks to read and object, and 
there hasn't been one peep of comment.

Whatever you decide/rule, I would like that it not involve any significant 
delay.

-Lofton.