Re: Draft submission to W3C QA Summit Meeting

[David_Marston@lotus.com]

I found one fine point that we should consider. Ken's draft reads:
"Where a response from the W3C is in question...the committee would like
an appeal process to be available where W3C responses can be officially
challenged."

Actually, the response probably comes from an individual, such as an
editor of the Recommendation. We want to appeal to the Working Group (WG)
as a whole, I think, when the response is not already from the whole WG.
If the response is from the whole WG, then we should push back at the WG
first before going to some other part of W3C. Clearly, I'm getting into
some of the workings of the process, so now let me suggest a milder
change to the verbiage:

"Where a response from a Working Group or one of its members is in
question...the committee would like an appeal process to be available
where responses can be officially challenged."

We may want to have another sentence following that to remind the
audience that such challenges are aimed at improving the testability
and hence the quality of the W3C Recommendation.
.................David Marston