Advisory Board - Activity in 2016
No matches.
GitHub
w3c/standards-track
-
2 issues opened.
-
Incomplete sentence in ¶ "Is it clear the proposers are not seeking a rubber stamp from W3C?" w3c/standards-track#24, by @stuartasutton.
-
definition of "aspirational" should be further clarified w3c/standards-track#23, by @tantek.
-
GitHub
w3c/standards-track
-
1 pull request closed.
-
fix indentation in in favor list w3c/standards-track#21.
-
GitHub
w3c/standards-track
-
4 issues opened.
-
arguments against incubation - clarify one on team participation w3c/standards-track#19, by @wayneca.
-
typo in "Clear RF licensing commitments?" w3c/standards-track#18, by @wayneca.
-
"gaps in the patent commitment" needs to be clarified - suggesting CLA problem? w3c/standards-track#17, by @wayneca.
-
target audience section doesn't include AC in decisions it shares with Director w3c/standards-track#14, by @wayneca.
-
-
3 issues closed.
-
arguments against incubation - clarify one on team participation w3c/standards-track#19.
-
target audience section doesn't include AC in decisions it shares with Director w3c/standards-track#14.
-
Clarify the stage at which screens apply w3c/standards-track#6.
-
-
3 issues received 4 new comments.
-
arguments against incubation - clarify one on team participation w3c/standards-track#19 (2 comments by @wayneca, @wseltzer)
-
target audience section doesn't include AC in decisions it shares with Director w3c/standards-track#14 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
-
6 pull requests opened.
-
fix indentation in in favor list w3c/standards-track#21, by @wayneca.
-
duplicating request #11 in latest version w3c/standards-track#20, by @wayneca.
-
problem statement downplays important WG roles w3c/standards-track#16, by @wayneca.
-
Reference W3C CG Charter template w3c/standards-track#15, by @wayneca.
-
target audience - combine Director and AC bullets w3c/standards-track#13, by @wayneca.
-
correct typos w3c/standards-track#12, by @wayneca.
-
-
5 pull requests merged.
-
duplicating request #11 in latest version w3c/standards-track#20.
-
Reference W3C CG Charter template w3c/standards-track#15.
-
problem statement downplays important WG roles w3c/standards-track#16.
-
target audience - combine Director and AC bullets w3c/standards-track#13.
-
correct typos w3c/standards-track#12.
-
-
2 pull requests closed.
-
moving arguments made from the problem statement w3c/standards-track#11.
-
contributors w3c/standards-track#9.
-
-
2 pull requests received 2 new comments.
-
moving arguments made from the problem statement w3c/standards-track#11 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
GitHub
w3c/standards-track
-
3 issues opened.
-
what is restricted by the criteria: Charter? what WG can do before FPWD? publishing FPWD? w3c/standards-track#8, by @wayneca.
-
Wording of consensus based argument against mandatory incubation w3c/standards-track#7, by @wayneca.
-
Clarify the stage at which screens apply w3c/standards-track#6, by @wseltzer.
-
-
7 issues closed.
-
what is restricted by the criteria: Charter? what WG can do before FPWD? publishing FPWD? w3c/standards-track#8.
-
Wording of consensus based argument against mandatory incubation w3c/standards-track#7.
-
Should there be a proof of initial consensus? w3c/standards-track#5.
-
Rubber stamp should not be an 'additional consideration' w3c/standards-track#4.
-
Role of the W3C staff and core process? w3c/standards-track#3.
-
We are not talking only about traditional Web Sites and browsers w3c/standards-track#2.
-
User's community w3c/standards-track#1.
-
-
8 issues received 13 new comments.
-
Should there be a proof of initial consensus? w3c/standards-track#5 (4 comments by @iherman, @michaelchampion)
-
Clarify the stage at which screens apply w3c/standards-track#6 (2 comments by @michaelchampion, @wseltzer)
-
what is restricted by the criteria: Charter? what WG can do before FPWD? publishing FPWD? w3c/standards-track#8 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
Wording of consensus based argument against mandatory incubation w3c/standards-track#7 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
Rubber stamp should not be an 'additional consideration' w3c/standards-track#4 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
We are not talking only about traditional Web Sites and browsers w3c/standards-track#2 (1 comment by @michaelchampion)
-
-
3 pull requests opened.
-
moving arguments made from the problem statement w3c/standards-track#11, by @chaals.
-
Add team involvement to develop proposals w3c/standards-track#10, by @wseltzer.
-
contributors w3c/standards-track#9, by @tantek.
-
-
1 pull request merged.
-
Add team involvement to develop proposals w3c/standards-track#10.
-