Hi all,
On Feb 26, 2007, at 1:39 PM, James Craig wrote:
I am not implying the uf group step to the deliberation level of
ISO or the W3C, but some issues should not be noted as REJECTED by
an individual, at least not without fair consideration and voting.
If this process exists, or if there is a process for rejection
APPEAL, it needs to be documented. If it does not exist, it needs
to be defined.
I agree. This issue has come up several times before, but never seems
to have gotten traction. So (as part of my Lenten penance :-) I've
finally decided to take the bull by the horns and put together a
proposal for addressing the various governance-related questions that
have been raised:
http://microformats.org/wiki/governance-issues
This may not be a perfect solution, but I really feel we need to do
*something*. If nothing else, hopefully this wiki page will help
capture our current "best thinking", as well as the pros and cons of
various concrete proposals.
I've also started capturing the "known" governance facts at:
http://microformats.org/wiki/governance
Hopefully someone can add links to any extant policies that we
already have.
Best,
-- Ernie P.
P.S. Apologies if this isn't the optimal format, but I haven't heard
anyone suggest a more constructive approach, and this seems most in
keeping with how we resolve other issues.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
