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

Re: Workshop and meeting requirements

From: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 15:54:22 +0000
To: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
CC: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <350D807A-70A4-4F1D-A9FB-921BB474FC27@adobe.com>

On May 12, 2014, at 6:31 PM, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> 
> On 2014-05-12 13:50, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>> On 5/12/2014 4:15 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> A laudable goal.  I think the TAG's event was not really "under W3C auspices" - i.e., I don't see how it fits under the given guidelines, but it was (imo) clearly a good thing.
>> 
>> I thought it was under W3C auspices because it was organized by the TAG.  The TAG is about "as W3C" as it gets.
>> 
>> Sure.  But as an event, there's no category as laid out in the process doc this fits under.  It was not directly sponsored by the W3C; it was just organized by the TAG members.  Put it this way - let's say Tantek and I decided we wanted to make a "Moving the W3C Forward" open-ended unconference happen.  Presuming the other AB members agreed with the idea, how would we go about doing this in order to clearly label as a W3C event?  Seems to me it would need to be a Workshop, with all that that implies.
> 
> Does every possible category of meeting that W3C conducts need to be discussed in the Process document?  Workshops belong in the process document because they can play a  particular role in the creation of new work in W3C.  But I don't think that implies that W3C can't put on other events.   The Process is a pain to change.  Everything doesn't need to be in there.  It should be for the big things about how the organization runs.

+1. While I understand why the Process document would define some parameters for WG, TAG and other meetings organized by W3C to closely support its activities (and start new ones) it cannot - and imo should not - try to define, predict or control all the other ways members may choose to meet and interact, with or without W3C sponsorship.

Though not as much of an old timer as most people here, I recall many conversations on the topic of 'how about having a dedicated meeting about X'. Number of times someone said "Let's check the Process document about this": 0. Number of times I expect someone to say "Let's check the Process document about this" in the next 25 years: 0. 

I wouldn't mind some prose to the effect of asking members to share the minutes of whatever non-WG meeting they might organize around their W3C work but that's about the extent of it.

And if we are concerned about the bureaucratic perception of W3C, I doubt that will be improved by lengthy threads on the topic of 'what is a meeting for the purpose of this document we update every 10 years'.
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2014 15:55:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:10 UTC