Merge core language from fep-37f2 into cg charter template

CGCharter-1727386911.html

@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ <h2 id="process">
 
     <p>
       The <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/">W3C Code of
-      Ethics and Professional Conduct</a> applies to participation in
+      Conduct</a> applies to participation in
       this group.
     </p>
 
@@ -214,20 +214,18 @@ <h2 id="transparency">
     <h2 id="decision">
       Decision Process
     </h2>
-    <p class="remove">
-      If the decision policy is documented somewhere, update this section accordingly to link to it.
-    </p>
     <p>
       This group will seek to make decisions where there is consensus. Groups
       are free to decide how to make decisions (e.g. Participants who have
       earned Committer status for a history of useful contributions assess
       consensus, or the Chair assesses consensus, or where consensus isn't
-      clear there is a Call for Consensus [CfC] to allow multi-day online
-      feedback for a proposed course of action). It is expected that
+      clear there is a Call for Consensus [CfC] (see below) to allow multi-day
+      online feedback for a proposed course of action). It is expected that
       participants can earn Committer status through a history of valuable
-      contributions as is common in open source projects. After discussion and
-      due consideration of different opinions, a decision should be publicly
-      recorded (where GitHub is used as the resolution of an Issue).
+      discursive contributions as is common in open source projects.
+      After discussion and due consideration of different opinions, a decision 
+      should be publicly recorded (where GitHub is used as the resolution 
+      of an Issue).
     </p>
     <p>
       If substantial disagreement remains (e.g. the group is divided) and the
@@ -241,15 +239,33 @@ <h2 id="decision">
       ahead with.
     </p>
     <p>
-      Any decisions reached at any meeting are tentative and should be recorded
-      in a GitHub Issue for groups that use GitHub and otherwise on the group's
-      public mail list. Any group participant may object to a decision reached
-      at an online or in-person meeting within 7 days of publication of the
-      decision provided that they include clear technical reasons for their
-      objection. The Chairs will facilitate discussion to try to resolve the
-      objection according to this decision process.
+      To afford asynchronous decisions and organizational deliberation, any 
+      resolution (including publication decisions) taken in a face-to-face 
+      meeting or teleconference will be considered provisional.
+      A call for consensus (CfC) will be issued for all resolutions via 
+      email to [email protected], preferably with the abbreviation CfC early
+      in the subject line to catch more attention.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Any group participant may object to a 
+      decision reached at an online or in-person meeting within 14 days of 
+      publication of the decision, provided that they include 
+      clear reasons for their objection grounded in the scope and documented
+      goals of the CG and its work items.
+    </p>
+    <h3 id="calls-for-consensus">
+      Calls for Consensus
+    </h3>
+    <p>  
+      The presence of formal resolutions will be indicated by a "CFC" prefix in the subject line of an email on the list.
+      Additional outreach to community venues for more affirmative consent is strongly encouraged.
+      There will be a response period of 14 days.
+      If no sustained objections are raised by the end of the response period, the resolution will be considered to have consensus as a resolution of the Community Group, i.e. a group decision.
+      All decisions made by the group should be considered resolved unless and until new information becomes available or unless reopened at the discretion of the Chairs or the Director.
     </p>
     <p>
+      The Chairs will facilitate discussion to try to resolve the
+      objection according to this decision process.
       It is the Chairs' responsibility to ensure that the decision process is
       fair, respects the consensus of the CG, and does not unreasonably favour
       or discriminate against any group participant or their employer.