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

Minutes of 13 June Process Document TF Telcon

From: Stephen Zilles <steve@zilles.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:25:18 -0700
To: <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <031201d1c598$8e86e100$ab94a300$@zilles.org>
Due to an accident of initiation, RRSAgent was not enabled, so these minutes
are being distributed by e-mail

Present: David Singer, Mike Champion, Steve Zilles 

Regrets: Jeff Jaffe, Charles McCathie Nevile

Scribe: Steve Zilles, Chair: Steve Zilles

[08:07]   SteveZ: why regrets Chaals?

[08:08] * Dsinger_ callin user 3, who are you?

[08:15] * Dsinger_ someone just joined?

[08:19]   Agenda:  

1. A new method to vote for AB and TAG Members  

https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2016_Priorities#Voting
https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/wiki/Voting2016 

2. A consideration of whether to include a notion of an Obsolete spec (not
to be confused with a rescinded spec) 

https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2016_Priorities#Maintenance

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2016May/0056.html  

3. Cleaning up the handling of the Appeals Process in the existing

Process Document 

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Jul/0027.html 

Note that item 11 in this message should also be labelled with Issue 167 and
that these changes address some of the issues that were raised in the e-mail
discussion of item 2 above. 

4. The existing CG discussion about Member organizations. 

https://www.w3.org/2016/02/15-w3process-minutes.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2016May/0003.html

5. Supergroups  https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2016_Priorities#Supergroups

[08:21] * chaals has a conflict with a Web Platform Chairs' meeting

[08:21]   Item 1 on Voting 

[08:21]   One question on voting is appealability of STV Tabulation system

[08:23]   Dsinger: I think the voting text is OK as is

[08:24]   Mike: I agree the voting text is OK; there is no reason to make a
statement about appeals

[08:25]   Consensus: Voting text is ready for inclusion in Process2016 draft

[08:25] <Dsinger_> We can deal with the appeal question, if needed, when we
discuss appeals

[08:26] <Dsinger_> Agreed, we are done on that too

[08:26]   Item 2: Text for Obsoleting a REC

[08:26]   Dsinger: we should just ask Chaals to integrate the most recent
text

[08:27]   Consensus: integrate text for Obsoleting a REC

[08:30]   Item 3: Appeals

[08:30]   The issue on appeals is: should all Director's Decisions be
appealable?

[08:31]   Dsinger: There is a difference between Director's Decisions
identified in the Process and operational decisions taken by the Director
and/or Team.

[08:32]   Mike: I am OK with such a proposal, but believe that appeals are
just a way to prolong a process whose result is already clear

[08:35]   Mike: Simplifying the process with a statement that all Director's
Decisions are appealable is OK with me

[08:35] <chaals> [+1 to Wayne's proposal, for the reasons he outlined - that
believable appeals processes saves us using them, or having extended
discussion we don't need]

[08:36]   SteveZ: I agree with the simplification as long as all the
Director's Decisions (which would be appealable) are identified in the
Process Document

[08:36]   SteveZ: I will send a list of what I think those are to the CG
mailing list

[08:37]   Dsinger: please include the decision to extend a WG charter

[08:40]   Item 4 Member Organizations

[08:40]   Consensus: Integrate the text for Member Organization in
Process2106 Draft

[08:41]   Item 5: Supergroups

[08:43] <chaals> [My apologies to Dave, I had hoped to have at least talked
to him about this before now]

[08:45]   Dsinger: the PSIG meets next Monday and the AB meets after that
and we should have text that we can that we can include

[08:45] * Dsinger_ no probs chaals

[08:45]   Dsinger: Please put out a calendar for next steps for Process2016

[08:47]   Mike: Formally, the AB owns updating the Process and the roles of
this CG and the PSIG are advisory

[08:50] * Dsinger_ needs to drop off.

[08:51] * Dsinger_ are we done?

[08:54]   SteveZ: The normal procedure for Process2016 is produce an
intergrated draft for to the AC for comments (ideally by July); process
those comments and produce a draft for an AC Review that would be open
across the AC Meeting at TPAC

[08:56] == Dsinger_ [~rooms@public.cloak] has quit [Client closed
connection]

[09:25] == LJWatson [~chatzilla@public.cloak] has quit ["Carpe diem"]

 
Received on Monday, 13 June 2016 17:25:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 June 2016 17:25:49 UTC