Re: We should require AI disclosure

On 08/07/2026 13.09, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
> Hi Ralph,
>
> I agree Council is not fully responsible, and I'd support saying so 
> explicitly. However, I think that XEP-0001 is already quite explicit 
> in this (requiring rough consensus, running code, Council approval 
> reads like the "shared responsibility" that we're talking about). I'm 
> not sure there's a gap.
>
> If you think the current _understanding_ differs from the current 
> text, that seems worth saying out loud on the list.

My understanding of how it should work (and worked during my 8 year 
tenure) is supported by what we have written down, but mostly focused on 
the perspective of an author. I increasingly feel that the current 
Council and Standards-JIG in general do not, as evidenced by the 
discussions on Experimental vs. Draft, the topic at hand, and perceived 
pressure on the work of the Editors and Council.

Our procedures are not very explicit about what is expected of Council 
or Editors, i.e. how to review and what the responsibility for the 
outcome is.

ralphm

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]