But I haven't travelled anywhere since the last summit
Tobias
i'm +1 for accept
jabberjockehas joined
MattJ
+1 also
Lance
+1, but it will likely need some more work as the sdp stuff for it gets hammered out
fippo
i'm +1 for accepting this. it needs more work, but that is because the datachannels are still somewhat in flux
Kev
I need to give it a better glance before not objecting, but I'm anticipating it being fine to publish.
Kev
I'll post on list once I've done so.
Kev
3) http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0152.html
Kev
I think, if i read xep1 correctly, we don't need to vote on an LC for this, and it's automatically given one because of the Council change.
Kev
stpeter (if you're paying attention, but I see you're on a call so maybe not), that sound about right?
stpeter
yes
Kev
Fab.
stpeter
just finished the call
Kev
The new Editor-Team can sort that out, then :)
ralphm
heh
Kev
(Assuming Board are about to ratify that)
Kev
4) Date of next.
stpeter
:)
ralphm
I'm sure it's on the agenda.
stpeter
I need to write up a charter for the Editor Team
Peter Waher
event logging and dynamic forms?
Kev
The reason I used to have to move it from 16:00 to 16:10 isn't an issue any more, so we could move back to 16:00, if people like.
Kev
Or we can keep it as the current 20mins, which is usually fine but sometimes tight.
stpeter
Peter Waher: I think the objections periods for those have ended, so I think they can be published now
ralphm
+1 on 16:00
Peter Waher
(y)
ralphm
so that we can start board at 16:30
Tobias
+1 on the time change too
MattJ
+1 for 16:10
fippo
16:00 works for me.
MattJ
er
stpeter
WFM
Peter Waher
I've updated them and answered to all objections. Should be fine.
Dave Cridland
I would prefer to have a short gap before the board meeting, anyway. There's often a few minutes of interesting chatter after the council.
MattJ
I didn't mean that!
MattJ
+1 for 16:00
Lance
+1 16:00
ralphm
MattJ: I call Jetlag.
MattJ
Meetings before breakfast
Kev
Ok, so 16:00 next Wed, then?
Tobias
wfm
MattJ
wfm
fippo
wfm
Lance
wfm
Kev
5) Any other business?
Dave Cridland
Kev, Yeah.
Kev
I immediately regret asking :)
MattJ
:)
Dave Cridland
Kev, In a discussion I had recently, the subject of the late and lamented tech review work team was mentioned.
Dave Cridland
Kev, Would the Council like an effort to reinstantiate that?
Peter Waher
you agree to publish the event logging and dynamic forms XEPs, latest revisions?
Kev
Peter Waher: My understanding was that those had passed Council. I can double-check later.
Peter Waher
they're not published yet
Kev
Peter Waher: See the ongoing discussion about the XEP Editor being overworked.
Kev
Dave Cridland: I'm not desperate to start a new work team unless there's actually a bunch of people who would want to be on it.
ralphm
Kev: agreed
Kev
Dave Cridland: If it's one person who wants to do some reviews, I don't see any problem with an informal arrangement.
Kev
If there /are/ a group of people who want to be reviewing stuff ~formally, then I'm not strictly opposed to reinstating it.
ralphm
Kev: in that case, the team is basically standards@ subscribers
Kev
It's a fine idea to have one.
Kev
ralphm: That's a nice idea, but I'm pretty sure most of standards@ subscribers aren't reviewing stuff muc.
Kev
Heh, Freudian slip. *much*
Kev
Dave Cridland: Do you think there's general interest in a formal team for doing reviews?
ralphm
Kev: I think we are in agreement
Kev
ralphm: An excellent place to be.
Dave Cridland
I don't know. I am vaguely under the impression there's a certain degree of interest members in doing *something*, and capitalizing on that might yield a work team.
ralphm
It might even be better to ask (to volunteer) specific people for specific documents
MattJ
What does a review team add over the council?
Kev
MattJ: The Council is a last resort.
Dave Cridland
But even the formation of such a team would involve effort, so I'm wondering if the Council see that as a laudable goal or not.
Kev
MattJ: It would be much better for document authors to have feedback earlier than "No, we're not letting this go to Draft".
Dave Cridland
MattJ, More eyeballs.
Kev
Dave Cridland: I'm not opposed. If it happened and worked it would be a Fine Thing. I'd be inclined to start by asking if there are actually people who want to participate in such a thing, rather than trying to formalise the flagpole and then see if anyone salutes.
Dave Cridland
Kev, Meaning COuncil needn't always be the Bad Guys.
Kev
There is that, although it's not really my concern in this.
Dave Cridland
Kev, It's not entirely clear to me if we already have the work team, with nobody actually doing anything with it. That is, the formal aspects might actually be done already.
Kev
But, for Experimental XEPs, for example. Council generally let stuff through that is fine to start, but they know is a long way off Draft quality. A review team could help with the interim.
Dave Cridland
But anyway, I'm good with the advice I have from Council.
Kev
Dave Cridland: I don't much care about the formality. If there are people wanting to do this, it'd be great for it to happen.
Kev
Anyone with anything else for anything else?
fippo
i just noted that peter requested 0279 as another agenda item