W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > August 2014

Re: voting simple illustration

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 16:49:27 -0700
Cc: public-w3process@w3.org
Message-id: <1847B49A-2BB7-4145-98FF-F23255718249@apple.com>
To: timeless@gmail.com

On Aug 25, 2014, at 16:11 , timeless@gmail.com wrote:

>> I have been involved in elections with quorum requirements.
>> Do we (w3c) have any now?
> 
> ITS did [1].
> WCAG has a "chair defined quorum" line.
> XForms markup thought it had a.m operative quorum requirement, but I can't find it. **
> QAWG draft did [2].
> SocialWeb [3] did (not sure what they are) 
> WebCGM (?) and WS and Mobile Web Best Practices, and TTML all seemed to fail some quorum requirements, WAI also seemed to fail 
> 
> ** we need to demand charters link for date versioned process documents!!

Thanks.  Yes, I think a lot of groups formally or informally take decisions made with only a small subset of the members as provisional;  as far as I know, we don’t have formal votes where quorum is required (e.g. TAG election, AB election, and even for charters, the new threshold is only a ‘warning’).

> 
> ‎
>> Even if we did, then some of the cases are covered by a simple failure to list a preference for some candidates (r.g. the quorum requirement that, to be elected, one has to receive yes votes from >Y% of the voting pool).
> 
> [1]‎ http://www.w3.org/2004/11/i18n-recharter/its-charter#voting
> [2] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/01/qawgpd-20030103.html#sub1-2
> [3] http://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialWebTeleconferences
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 25 August 2014 23:49:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:11 UTC