Re: Limiting Charter extensions

On 21/12/14 17:40, L. David Baron wrote:

>> The process has never been very heavy. You you write a charter, W3M reviews it, the AC review it, unless there are major objections you publish it. Even the worst case in recent memory - HTML and the license experiment - only took months. And a lot of that time was because instead of just holding the discussion and making decisions, W3C tried to sort out everything in advance so there was no disagreement. So successfully that even the people whose original objection they were trying to satisfy were not satisfied with the result.

Humppppfffff !!!!

> The CSS 2010-2011 rechartering took over a year.  Discussion in the
> WG started in August of 2010 [1] and the charter was approved in
> December of 2011 [2].
>
> The most recent CSS rechartering took only 7.5 months, from November
> 2013 [3] to July 2014 [4] (though the previous charter originally
> expired in September 2013, so maybe that should count as 9 months).

I confirm this. And I am surprised any AC - in particular you chaals -
can say the rechartering process "has never been very heavy". It is
possibly light for some groups, but I said _multiple_ times in the AC
Forum or during AC Meetings that it was totally overkill for
supergroups like the CSS WG.

To be totally clear: no, this is not CSS WG's fault; the process is
guilty. So one issue of that kind should be enough to raise a loud
alarm that should be solved ASAP.

It takes a long time because it's complex, there are a lot of documents
involved in the AC review, the constraints on rechartering are not
light, and I also said multiple times that time expectations for
deliverables are, in my personal opinion, totally stupid. They take
a lot, REALLY a lot, FAR TOO MUCH time to discuss and agree. And I
don't even mention the fact they're usually not realistic. They are
counter-productive and, let me repeat it, pointless. Remove them and
we can recharter in two weeks. Remove the prioritization too for the
same reason. Prioritization is NOT in the hands of the WG, it's in
the hands of the implementors because we rely on their tests and on
the two implementations we need for REC.

I see our rechartering process as a failure of an unbearable magnitude,
at least for a supergroup like ours. I repeat: unbearable. I see the
fact we've been unable to fix this since my september 2013 alert [1],
15 months ago, as another failure of unbearable magnitude.

Whatever we decided here, if a rechartering process takes more than
a month and more than 2 aggregated days of work, it's from my point
of view a failure. I urge you all to be more pragmatic and not only
find a resolution ASAP, but implement it immediately. 15 months after
september 2013, this is _highly_ time. Thanks.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Sep/0011.html

</Daniel>

Received on Sunday, 21 December 2014 17:36:55 UTC