Define and Document Committee Proposal Process

[jorydotcom]

We need to document a process for how TC53 work advances from an idea to committee deliverable (typically either in the form of a specification or a technical report).

The process should describe stages/steps/phases, what is needed to enter or leave each phase/step/phase, and how a decision is taken that the conditions for each phase have been met.

TC39's proposal staging process is one source of inspiration: proposal documents are captured as separate repos, where the proposals advance through the staging process via consensus decision-making. Conditions for stage advancement include tests, documentation, number of implementations, and so forth. W3C's process document is another; in that case a formal vote is required for work to advance.

Whatever we chose to do, it is critical that 1) it is a process we can all support and adhere to, 2) it is documented, 3) it reflects reality and 4) there is a clear path to change this process when it no longer satisfies the prior conditions.

Who's interested in working on something for this? It would be great to get a subset of the group collaborating on a proposal we can discuss at the next teleconference.

[jorydotcom]

Talking with @phoddie the other day, I think it would be a good idea to start capturing some things we will value in a process, so that those inform our approach (which may well be to adapt an existing path from another TC or WG). In addition to making it clear and verifiable, other ideas we had in terms of process value included:

• Respect for expertise
• Avoiding dueling doc edits (don't weaponize the process for debate)
• Sharing ideas early & often - encourage sharing before an idea is "fully baked"

What other things would ya'll value in a process?