W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Decision process in the HTML working group

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 09:30:33 -0700
Message-Id: <9700550D-C609-4C5F-95A4-C577DBAC0559@apple.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, www-archive@w3.org
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>

On May 7, 2007, at 7:58 AM, Dan Connolly wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> [...]
>> Well, there's people in between where it's hard for me to tell if  
>> they would have registered an FO as a follow-on to a "no" vote.
> This business where the FO is a follow-on to a decision seems
> broken, to me. The point at which to object, formally, is when
> the question is put, not after the decision is made.

I've asked around, and that doesn't seem to be the way other W3C  
Working Groups do it. I've heard from representatives from the Web  
API, WAF, SVG, CSS, CDF, Web Security Context, Mobile Web Best  
Practices and Device Description WGs, in all cases they decide by  
simple majority after sufficient discussion, and Formal Objections  
have to be registered separately. I encourage you to ask other chairs  
about this.

The Process document also says: "In the W3C process, an individual  
may register a Formal Objection to a decision."  This seems pretty  
clear that the Formal Objection is to a decision actually made, not  
just a proposed resolution. I feel a little guilty citing the Process  
document, but I really do think a voting process where every  
disagreement with the majority must be reviewed by the Director  
creates practical problems as cited in my original email.

Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 16:30:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:43:11 UTC