Gerv - for the final agenda for tomorrow's call, I'm leaving the Group 1 ballots (only in drafting stage) where they were at the end of the list, and indicating that discussion for each is optional -- so I won't go through the list asking each author for an update, I'll just ask if anyone wants to discuss any of the ballots in drafting stage. Let's see how that works.
I'm concerned that if we create yet another public web page for this, it won't be updated. -----Original Message----- From: Gervase Markham [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 9:56 AM To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]>; Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> Cc: Kirk Hall <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: Draft Agenda for CABF teleconference April 27 On 23/04/17 21:08, Kirk Hall via Public wrote: > We always review the status of ballots. I can see the value in making sure we keep track of ballots. Perhaps, though, the agenda for a teleconference might not be the best place? There are, as we know, various ballot phases: 1) Drafting period 2) Discussion period 3) Voting period 4) IPR review period It seems to me that having a standing agenda item for 2) and 3) makes most sense. Ballots in stage 1) could be added at the request of the lead drafter. Unless there is an Exclusion Notice, ballots in stage 4) are not very interesting (and their exit from IPR review is heralded by an email to the list). So perhaps it might make most sense to have a public web page somewhere where we keep track of which ballot is in which stage, but confine the agenda items to groups 2) and 3)? Gerv _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
