Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02-01 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review?"
While I support the creation of the WG, I have some comments on the charter: 1) is it necessary to include the first four paragraphs about the history ? 2) the charter insists on 'no delay' but the previous version of the charter is dated 2015... ;-) 3) is the word 'entertain' the right one in "OpenPGP may be entertained by the working group" ? For a non-English speaker, the word 'entertain' is about getting fun but there seems to be other meaning 4) in"the working group will accept no I-D" s/accept/adopt/ ? 5) I do not know about the context, but the last paragraph looks to me like requesting a WGLC before adoption. Also, it requires two reviews but what will happen if those two reviews are negative ?
> Furthermore, the working group will accept no I-D's as working group > items unless there is a review by at least two un-interested parties of > the I-D as part of the acceptance process. Does this mean that the working group won't adopt any IDs as working group items unless it has been reviewed by two un-interested parties? If so, perhaps change accept/acceptance to adopt/adoption?