On 4/27/21 3:06 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
We might want to try to make this more consistent across wg's including perhaps redefining "adoption”.I hope not. WGs are different.
Different WGs are (and need to be) different, but it's confusing if "adoption" means very different things from one WG to another.
I have generally interpreted "adoption" as meaning "the WG wants to use this document as a basis for (some of) its work". It's not (and shouldn't be) a consensus call on the document itself, that's what WGLC is for. It's not exactly an assertion of WG "control" over the document, though everyone should understand that drafts intended to be WG drafts need to permit creation of derivative works (i.e. forking). Nor should it be taken as a commitment on the part of the WG to try to publish that document or earn a particular status for it.
Keith
