Review a participant agreement individual vs. entity decision

[domenic]

In whatwg/html#3504 @ediosyncratic has submitted a small editorial fix (see #63). Until/unless #63 is resolved, we require the participation agreement to be signed for such fixes.

In it he details his employment; by my reading the key takeaway is that they work on

classes to make REST and http(2|s|) requests and for use in implementing servers

which seems internet-related, but not web-specific.

I'm planning to merge the PR anyway, as I believe my judgment is correct and per https://whatwg.org/workstream-policy#contribution-validation

Editors are responsible for ensuring that material included in their Living Standards is governed by a Contributor and Workstream Participant Agreement.

But as part of that responsibility, I'd like to validate with the SG, and in doing so maybe make the lives of future editors easier if they need to make similar judgments.

[othermaciej]

Do you have a link handy to his participant data?

[othermaciej]

Oh, never mind, he has a lengthy explanation in the PR of his employer and what her works on. I think it's correct to judge this as not working in the field of web technologies.

[ediosyncratic]

It's also worth mentioning that, at least for the grammar-fix in question, copyright is almost certainly inapplicable - the change is merely a mechanical application of a standard rule of grammar, with no creative element at all.

[othermaciej]

I think the new definition of "field of web technologies" and "working in the field of web technologies" resolves this.

[ediosyncratic]

@othermaciej - I failed to find any definition of either term in the page you linked to. Its only use of the word "field" was in a familiar clause that relied on me to know what it means by "working in the field of web technologies" (which I don't). Did you get the wrong link ? Otherwise, please quote the relevant definitions.

[ediosyncratic]

Oh - wait, reloading the page - now search finds more hits, including that definition !

[othermaciej]

Proposed SG decision: it's ok for this individual to sign the individual participation agreement, since the new definition of working in the field of web technologies makes clear that it's the individual's role that counts.

[travisleithead]

I agree that the Field of Web Technologies definition covers this case given what we know about this individual's employment.

[dbaron]

sounds good

[foolip]

I support this decision.