W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > August 2016

Re: Process Document change - New Section 10.5 Member Submission of a proposed Working Group Charter

From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAKMeYjrGJZJcvZnbJRWbm3HfnUyT9fNpMm2NZ2zjESpzKL8LQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: wayne carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Cc: public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
This seems reasonable. (Admittedly, I'm wearing an IE hat)

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:34 AM, wayne carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> I'll be dropping out of W3C in 3 weeks (resigning from my current job and
> taking time off for studying some things I'm interested in).  Other than
> some areas we've already reached consensus on here recently (but I think not
> yet in a Process draft), there was one more thing I wanted to propose and
> get in the archive so it could be looked at in the future.
>
> The W3C Membership has no way to initiate the approval process for a Charter
> for a new WG unless W3C management (and the Director) decide to do it.  The
> Membership can only request it and the W3C staff can decline.  That's a
> significant gap if this is to be an organization controlled by its
> Membership.  I think there is a very simple way to add it.
>
> Like all the other appeals, having them available ensures they don't ever
> need to be used.  The simpler less formal process can be used instead and
> the appeals are only if something really goes wrong and somehow what the
> Membership wants isn't happening.
>
> Proposal:
>
> New Section 10.5 Member Submission of a proposed Working Group Charter
>
>
> Member Submissions have long been used to suggest new work in W3C.
> Workshops, requests to the Team, and Team initiated proposals are more
> common paths. In all these instances, the Director then decides whether to
> begin an AC Review to approve a Working Group Charter. Those are the
> preferred paths for starting new work. This section provides another path
> for initiating an AC Review of a proposed Charter directly by the Advisory
> Committee.
>
> A Member Submission may include a proposed Working Group Charter, where the
> request is for the Team to submit the proposed Charter to Advisory Committee
> Review for starting the Working Group.  Incubator specs for every proposed
> specification deliverable must be part of the Member Submission, along with
> the Charter.   If the Team acknowledges a Submission, but rejects the
> proposal to Submit the Charter to AC Review, then the TAG,  AB or 5% of the
> AC may cause the start of an Advisory Committee Appeal vote as in Section
> 7.2.  That appeals vote would then decide whether to instruct the Team to
> prepare the Charter and put it to AC Review. The Director, for budgetary
> reasons, could choose to offer only minimal team support in the Charter for
> the proposed group.
Received on Friday, 12 August 2016 17:16:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 12 August 2016 17:16:54 UTC