[cabfpub] Potential F2F Topics

[Jeremy Rowley]

Plus, I don't see any harm in proposals being made, even if the Forum
doesn't create binding requiring on Browser UI. We often have guests present
on topics of interest that are not necessarily intended to result in a
guideline/requirement. 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of Peter Bowen
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 8:52 AM
To: Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org>
Cc: CABFPub <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Potential F2F Topics


> On Oct 3, 2016, at 7:26 AM, Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:
> 
> It's good that we now have an established practice of nominating 
> discussion leaders for each slot. It would be good if the discussion 
> leader for each slot could, _before_ we assemble, state in a couple of 
> sentences what the goal of that slot is. If the chairman could perhaps 
> try and elicit such statements from the relevant people, I feel sure 
> that would enhance our efficiency.
> 
> I would also note that there is currently an item on the agenda 
> "Potential change to browser UI for Subject DN". It is a long-accepted 
> truth that the CAB Forum does not place requirements on browser UI. It 
> may be worth making that clear again now, so that we can use that time 
> for other items.

Before trying to shoot down any discussion, how about we have the proposed
leader send an abstract to the list on the topic to see if there is
interest?  It is possible that it could morph into a useful discussion.

Thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4964 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161003/f5fd6332/attachment.bin