Re: DRAFT: PngReg 2017-02-15

On 2017-02-27 09:05, Glenn Randers-Pehrson wrote:
> No one has commented on this draft.  Should we go ahead
> with another CFD, or are there still things needing to be
> fixed before that?
>
> Glenn
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Glenn Randers-Pehrson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I hope this satisfactorily addresses concerns from Chris and John.
It helps, yes. Thank you.
>> I didn't add anything about etiquette which seems to me should go without
>> saying.
The trouble with things that go without saying is that after a while, 
they do need saying. As examples:
a)  W3C assumed good behaviour and netiquette but then later found it 
necessary to document a Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/
b) W3C assumed at the start that because specifications were freely 
available that they were obviously also free to implement; but 
increasing involvement with other industries with very different 
assumptions (consumer electronics, telcos, ISO SC29) meant that we had 
to document a royalty free patent policy
https://www.w3.org/2004/02/05-patentsummary.html
c) many conferences now have a code of conduct. Often these are copied 
or referenced by other conferences, so they spread.
http://confcodeofconduct.com/

I would not want the registration procedure to become lengthy or to 
describe professional conduct at length, but perhaps a one-sentence 
statement, or a link to some code of conduct, would be appropriate.

-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot