W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > March 2015

Re: ISSUE-133 - TAG role / makeup

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:15:39 -0700
Cc: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <A207485C-8C23-4396-8E1D-2E5CB1CBC567@apple.com>
To: chaals@yandex-team.ru
Some quick reactions.  Overall, I think I need motivations rather than, or at least as well as, solutions!


> On Mar 9, 2015, at 22:57 , chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> <https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/133>
> 
> We have made a change to this in the draft Process 2015, loosening the constraint for people who are hired by a company that already has a member.
> 
> I propose a rather more substantial set of changes:
> 
> - TAG has 12 members, including TimBL, 3 nominated by the Director, 9 elected by the membership.

12 seems awfully large.  That is the maximum I see recommended for some boards.  Why so large?

> - The chair(s) must be chosen from among TAG members, by the Director.

Not true today?

> - The TAG are elected by "Schulze-STV" (rather than the current system), 4 or 5 per year like the AB.

You mean, as I also suggest for the AB?

> - Any number of employees of a member can be nominated, however only the one who is most preferred can take a seat. The others will be eliminated with the seats going to the next-most preferred candidate(s).

OK, this is a change we could make at any time.  Why is it goodness to nominate more than one, of whom only one can be elected?

> - A W3C member who employs a member of the TAG *must not* nominate another person for election.

OK, this is a little odd.  You mean, nominate from their own employees (I assume I could always nominate Chaals as long as he doesn’t work for me)? As others note, this needs to say “employs a member of the upcoming TAG (that TAG that is to come after the election)”.

> - TAG members participate as representatives of their employer, for Patent Policy purposes. The Process already says this, but the current TAG charter which cannot override Process gives a different impression - this is affirming that the charter should be changed.

I think the confusion over the TAG comes not from when the TAG writes a document based on Contributions from its Members, but when they review documents from other WGs.  I hope that the old and new processes are quite clear about TAG products and Contributions.

> 
> Cheers
> 
> Chaals
> 
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 10 March 2015 20:16:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 10 March 2015 20:16:10 UTC