-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Define minutes #511
Labels
Closed: Accepted
The issue has been addressed, though not necessarily based on the initial suggestion
Milestone
Comments
fantasai
added
the
Agenda+
Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call
label
Mar 15, 2021
frivoal
added a commit
to frivoal/w3process
that referenced
this issue
Mar 15, 2021
Merged
frivoal
added a commit
to frivoal/w3process
that referenced
this issue
Mar 15, 2021
This was referenced Mar 23, 2021
Closed
The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed The full IRC log of that discussion<plh> Topic: Define minutes<plh> dsinger: #511, #512 <fantasai> github: https://github.com//issues/511 <plh> Florian: since we talk about recordings of meetings, we need to define that you don't need permissions for minutes <wseltzer> q+ <dsinger> q? <dsinger> ack ws <plh> wseltzer: I recommend avoiding defining the precision of minutes <plh> wseltzer: a summary of the conversation is fine for example <plh> ... we don't need to be prescriptive <TallTed> "Relevant details of the discussion...?" <TallTed> q+ <wseltzer> "summary" <plh> florian: record of the discussion is required but you don't have to be precise <plh> ack TallTed <plh> Ted: how about "relevant details" ? <plh> Florian: I'll look into the sentence more <jeff> q+ <plh> david: are people ok with us defining minutes? (details to be worked on) <dsinger> ack jeff <plh> Jeff: do we really need to define minutes? <plh> florian: we are talking recordings and automatic transcript. if we don't distinguish minutes from those, it may create confusion <dsinger> q? <plh> [going back and forth on whether we need this or not] <plh> Jeff: if it becomes a point of debate and we cannot close on it, it's not worth blocking on it] <plh> q? <dsinger> q? |
frivoal
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 30, 2021
dwsinger
removed
the
Agenda+
Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call
label
Apr 14, 2021
The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed
The full IRC log of that discussion<fantasai> Topic: Define Minutes<fantasai> github: https://github.com//issues/511 <fantasai> dsinger: We discussed in previous meeting, can't remember conclusion <fantasai> florian: IIRC we were in almost agreement, and then wseltzer quesiton some of the phrasing, which was later fixed <fantasai> florian: so once we had that agreement, I merged it <fantasai> dsinger: Anybody think we got this wrong or should I take off agenda? <dsinger> q? <fantasai> RESOLVED: close issue |
frivoal
added
the
Closed: Accepted
The issue has been addressed, though not necessarily based on the initial suggestion
label
Apr 14, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Closed: Accepted
The issue has been addressed, though not necessarily based on the initial suggestion
We have some requirements applying to the minutes of meetings, e.g. in
https://www.w3.org/2020/Process-20200915/#GeneralMeetings
and in the new tooling requirements
https://www.w3.org/wiki/W3C_Tooling_Policy
But we don't actually define what the minutes are or that they need to exist. Seems like such a definition would be helpful both for these sections to be able to reference, but also to help distinguish them from the transcripts being addressed by #334
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: