Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Copy edits for Standing Committees and Working Groups documentation #186

Open
4 tasks
JasonWeill opened this issue Oct 24, 2023 · 2 comments
Open
4 tasks

Comments

@JasonWeill
Copy link
Contributor

JasonWeill commented Oct 24, 2023

The files standing_committees_and_working_groups.md and list_of_standing_committees_and_working_groups.md have some issues:

  • standing_committees_and_working_groups refers to the "EB", using the now-obsolete term "Executive Board". This should be replaced with "Executive Council" or "EC" (spelled out on first reference)
  • list_of_standing_committees_and_working_groups should include a brief description of what a Standing Committee (SC) is and what a Working Group (WG) is
  • standing_committees_and_working_groups uses long bulleted lists to define SCs and WGs, and aspects common to both. For improved readability, these should be flattened into prose paragraphs.
  • Clarify that a team should have a public presence, not necessarily on GitHub. Discourse or a web site are also sufficient.

Tasks

No tasks being tracked yet.
@Ruv7
Copy link
Contributor

Ruv7 commented Oct 24, 2023

Jason - can you add this to the list: I'd like to edit this to say "a public presence" so that it doesn't have to be on GH. Could be Discourse.: The specific section I'm talking about is the one that reads "Maintain a public GitHub repository with basic information (council members, charter, public meetings, SSC representative, etc.) for purposes of transparency and consistency."

@Ruv7
Copy link
Contributor

Ruv7 commented Oct 24, 2023

Follow up. As a discussion point for the EC I will get more info on expectations or process for making changes to the Governance documents. It may or may not be the case that editorial points such as fixing a typo like EB vs EC have to follow a different process than a more substantive change. I'll share more info once we have time in the agenda to include this in a future meeting. This is coming up for me because here and in another place where I'm proposing a structure for founding new Standing Committees and Working Groups. Essentially what I need to clarify is who votes on proposed changes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants