And then README describes how you're doing your spec (says what files to look at for what details etc) - polyfills/patches can maybe go here, too. And you should use CONTRIBUTING.md to describe how you're using GitHub (because that gets linked on Issues/Pull Request pages).
See the "what's the process"
I don't want to end up with multiple processes, so I would prefer clarifications on those
instead of any new stuff
I'll probably have "What's the process" be the big part of the README.md, with links out to the best practices around each step
Of course there's also the angle of engagement with specs the reader isn't putting forward
Which is basically what Discourse is for
I'm thinking "the process" is more of a best-practices thing than an admin thing, since of course there are other ways to bring a spec into WICG
but this is the, you know, "best" way to do it
I imagine there's probably a W3C general CoC that WICG follows
yeah
but it would be good to be explicit about that
bbl
What avenue do people have if they want to add something to the W3C Code of Conduct?
And make it clear that we're willing to do so
To be clear, it's this one, right? http://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/
@stuartpb make sure you "@" my username to get my attention. Otherwise I will miss what you say :(
marcoscaceres @marcoscaceres has gitter, skype, IRC, iMessage, slack etc.... instant chat overlaod
stuartpb @stuartpb is designing one more, too
The process for getting any changes into the Code of Conduct is to send proposals to the Positive Work Environment TF public-pwe@w3.org
again, there is nothing to do about that right now
I'll note the address and list for discussion (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pwe/) in the README
And/or sending a message to @w3c on twitter
because she is very responsive to those as well
@marcoscaceres I'd preserve the glossary links if possible
I might send a separate PR for that