[cabfpub] Validation WG

[Ryan Sleevi]

Jeremy,

Just to check - I don't recall there being a formal ballot to terminate the
WG (as per section 5.2 of the bylaws), so a few quick and easy process
questions:

1) Do you expect that the continuation of the Validation WG will be
conducted in accordance with the scope and deliverables of Ballot 143 (
https://cabforum.org/2015/02/18/ballot-143-formalization-validation-working-group/
), which established the Validation WG?
2) Do you intend to propose a Ballot to terminate the Validation WG upon
the completion of some deliverable?

Considering that the Validation WG will be having phone meetings, for the
sake of members' protection with respect to our IPR policy, and the fact
that Participants Contributions cannot be Excluded from the RF license if
incorporated into a FG/FMG and were recorded in the minutes as such, does
the Validation WG intend to adhere to (a) and (b) of Section 5.2, namely:
(a) Draft and final agendas for Working Group meetings, Forum Meetings and
Forum Teleconferences (including any sub-groups or committees).
(b) Final minutes of Forum Meetings and Forum Teleconferences (including
minutes of any sub-groups or committees), and minutes of all Working Group
teleconferences and meetings.


Given the potential sensitivities, I think we would be more inclined to
propose a ballot to terminate the Validation WG unless we can receive
assurances that the bylaws' process will be followed with respect to
minutes, such that we can accurately and completely track the provenance of
any proposals put forward by the members of the Validation WG, given that,
to date, it seems matters within the Validation WG have been the only ones
which have triggered Exclusion Notices. Given this, the Validation WG
should take appropriate precautions to ensure that calls are recorded,
minutes are complete and accurate, and no suggestions are incorporated into
any ballots without the ability to track who contributed what, and when.

Alternatively, conducting all matters on the list, without any phone calls,
would be sufficient to ensure that all members Contributions are reflected
as such, as per 8.3 (c) of our IPR policy:
c. “Contribution” means material, including Draft Guidelines, Draft
Guideline text, and modifications to other Contributions, made verbally or
in a tangible form of expression (including in electronic media) which is
provided by a Participant in the process of developing a Draft Guideline
for the purpose of incorporating such material into a Draft Guideline or a
Final Guideline or Final Maintenance Guideline. For a verbal contribution
to be deemed a Contribution hereunder it must be memorialized within
approved meeting minutes of the CAB Forum.


On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Jeremy Rowley via Public <
public at cabforum.org> wrote:

> During the face-to-face we discussed restarting the validation working
> group. Please let me know if you are interested and the agenda items you’d
> like to discuss. We plan on starting the meetings at the time slot
> previously occupied by the code signing working group (9 Pacific).
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161107/e804523a/attachment-0003.html>