[governance] Digital restrictions management in HTML standards

[Avri Doria]

oh my!


On 10 May 2013, at 23:36, parminder wrote:

> 
> On Friday 10 May 2013 02:16 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
>> 
>> Are there any objections to Avri's proposal below?
> 
> From Avri's proposes template " The IGC is ...*. The participants in the IGC support this petition. "
> 
> Dont understand what it means.... to me it means all participants in IGC support, which means IGC supports......
> 
> And if there is a typo and it is meant to say "the following or undersigned participants in the IGC support the petition"
> 
> I am not sure how this in between category works, to me either (1) IGC is supporting something or (2) a set of individuals/ orgs are supporting something with no reference to IGC
> 
> What is bar to qualify for this new in-between category, indicated b Avri's framing...... Can, for instance,  I and a friend, also on the IGC list, build up a statement and say,
> 
> "The IGC is ....... . The following  participants in the IGC support this petition".
> 
> My view: either IGC supports something and otherwise there is no mention of IGC...
> 
> parminder
> 
> 
>> 
>> (If we have consensus on this general course of action, I think that
>> the next steps on this would be informal editing and then a consensus
>> process to create a bit of fluff text on what is the IGC etc., to go
>> along with with the sentence that expresses support for the petition.)
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>> 
>> Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote on 28 Apr 2013:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I have personally signed and would support a statement if we could
>>> say something that like:
>>> 
>>> "
>>> The IGC is ...*.
>>> The participants in the IGC support this petition.
>>> 
>>> signed
>>> {set of those who endorse - individuals and organizational
>>> participants} "
>>> 
>>> Any more and we would probably be involved in substantive issues.
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> * do we have a canned "who the IGC is" stmt - or is that a
>>> substantive issue?
>>> 
>>> On 28 Apr 2013, at 18:00, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>> 
>>>> What are the views about the idea of in addition issuing a brief
>>>> IGC statement in support of this petition or with a message similar
>>>> to it?
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> Norbert
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Many people here may wish to sign this petition.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.defectivebydesign.org/no-drm-in-html5
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t