On 5/28/2013 10:22 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
In reading through the draft, particularly the section on questions for
WG adoption of a draft, I did not see the questions I consider most
pertinent:
I appreciate Dave and Adrian for producing this helpful start, and I'm
mostly comfortable with where this conversation has gone since Adrian
asked for feedback on this list.
I wanted specifically to echo Joel's suggestions for additional questions.
Does the WG think this is a reasonable (preferably good) basis for
starting to work collectively on the deliverable?
I read this as "is this stable enough for a working group to work on it,
or might we still want to tell some small number of people to go off in
a corner and try again to produce something that IS a reasonable basis?"
I agree. To the extent that a working group really does control the
contents of a working group draft, if the working group doesn't agree
that the draft is a reasonable basis, making consensus calls about
massive rewrites seems more painful than we are hoping for.
Another question many WGs have found useful is:
Are there enough people interested and willing to write and / or review
the document?
Exactly. We should work on working group drafts. If a working group
doesn't have the resources and willingness to work on the document, I'm
not sure how much sense it makes to adopt it as a draft that's being
officially ignored by the working group :-)
Spencer