Editorial: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/18-w3process-minutes.html, acknowledgements
authorcharles
Tue, 16 Dec 2014 15:23:12 +0300
changeset 131 13d93c5ec375
parent 130 88ce0075da9d
child 132 c42095c2375d
Editorial: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/18-w3process-minutes.html, acknowledgements
cover.html
--- a/cover.html	Tue Dec 16 14:55:21 2014 +0300
+++ b/cover.html	Tue Dec 16 15:23:12 2014 +0300
@@ -2142,14 +2142,15 @@
       <p>The requirements for <dfn>wide review</dfn> are not precisely defined
         by the W3C Process. The objective is to ensure that the entire set of
         stakeholders of the Web community, including the general public, have
-        had adequate notice of the progress of the Working Group and thereby an
-        opportunity to comment on the specification. Before approving
-        transitions, the Director will consider who has been explicitly offered
-        a reasonable opportunity to review the document, who has provided
-        comments, the record of requests to and responses from reviewers,
-        especially groups identified as dependencies in the charter, and seek
-        evidence of clear communication to the general public about appropriate
-        times and which content to review. </p>
+        had adequate notice of the progress of the Working Group (for example
+        through notices posted to <a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>)
+        and thereby an opportunity to comment on the specification. Before
+        approving transitions, the Director will consider who has been
+        explicitly offered a reasonable opportunity to review the document, who
+        has provided comments, the record of requests to and responses from
+        reviewers, especially groups identified as dependencies in the charter,
+        and seek evidence of clear communication to the general public about
+        appropriate times and which content to review. </p>
       <p>For example, inviting review of new or significantly revised sections
         published in Working Drafts, and tracking those comments and the Working
         Group's responses, is generally a good practice which would often be
@@ -3218,9 +3219,16 @@
       <h2>14 <a id="acks">Acknowledgments</a></h2>
       <p>The following individuals have contributed to this proposal for a
         revised Process: Daniel Appelquist (Telefonica), Art Barstow (Nokia),
-        Mark Crawford (SAP), Daniel Glazman (Disruptive Innovations), Cullen
-        Jennings (Cisco), Eduardo Gutentag (unaffiiliated), David Singer
-        (Apple), and Josh Soref (Blackberry).</p>
+        Robin Berjon (W3C), Judy Brewer (W3C), Marcos Caceres (Mozilla), Wayne
+        Carr (Intel), Michael Champion (W3C), Mark Crawford (SAP), Karl Dubost
+        (Mozilla), Fantasai (unaffiliated), Virginie Galindo (Gemalto), Daniel
+        Glazman (Disruptive Innovations), Eduardo Gutentag (unaffiiliated), Brad
+        Hill (Facebook), Cullen Jennings (Cisco), Jeff Jaffe (W3C), Brain
+        Kardell (JQuery), Peter Linss (HP), Nigel Megitt (BBC), Olle Olsson
+        (SICS), Natasha Rooney (GSMA), Sam Ruby (IBM), David Singer (Apple),
+        Henri Sivonen (Mozilla), Josh Soref (Blackberry), Anne van Kesteren
+        (Mozilla), Léonie Watson (The Paciello Group), Mike West (Google), Chris
+        Wilson (Google), Steve Zilles (Adobe).</p>
       <p>The following individuals contributed to the development of earlier
         versions of the Process: Jean-François Abramatic (IBM, and previously
         ILOG and W3C), Dan Appelquist (Telefonica), Art Barstow (Nokia), Ann
@@ -3252,6 +3260,7 @@
         <li>Loosen requirement on multiple employees of one member on TAG -
           section 2.5.1</li>
         <li>Replace "W3C Chair" with "CEO"</li>
+        <li>Editorial tweaks to what is requested for review</li>
       </ul>
       <h3>Previous Editor's drafts</h3>
       <ul>