Re: [mpowr] Re: Quality Control and that nasty A word

[Pekka Savola <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, James Kempf wrote:
> Could you explain a little more? What exactly do you mean by the chair being
> a "developer"? If you read Margaret's draft (which I presume you did, since
> you're commenting on this thread) then you know that she has proposed that
> chairs are no longer allowed to be authors or editors of drafts, except for
> a limited period during which they are in transition between one role and
> another. So, if that's what you mean by being a "developer", that particular
> concern would be covered if that part of Margaret's draft is instituted. 

This is not what the draft says.  WG chairs can be authors and editors 
as well, *as long as* they do not serve in the same role for the 
particular document at the same time.  I.e., if there are two chairs, 
one can author/edit a document without problems still.

Removing that possibility might be interesting, but would the WG get 
anything done then? :-)  WG chairs are often the last resort of 
pushing through the documents when WG falls into paralysis :-)


-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings


_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr