W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Is the TAG structure harmful? [Was: Fwd: Forced Resignation]

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:49:22 -0400
Message-ID: <53B19512.4020805@intertwingly.net>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
CC: "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
On 06/30/2014 11:13 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
> The rule in question is small and simple, and altering it in the Process
> is a rather straightforward, well-defined change. I think that it would
> be beneficial for the AB to get into the habit of making such small,
> well-defined changes to the Process on a regular basis (whenever required).

The rules in question is defined here:

http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AB-TAG-constraints

One obvious solution is to drop one or more constraints.  More focused 
alternatives that may be worth considering:

1) Increase the limits to two.  Addresses the two recent, and one not so 
recent (tbray) cases.  Keeps these groups fairly diverse.

2) Change the constraints to only be evaluated at appointment/election 
time, thereby allowing anybody who was previously elected to complete 
their term.  Also addresses the known cases.  While it doesn't place an 
upper limit on company participation, it does effectively put a strict 
time limit on deviations from the policy.

Personally, I don't see a need for these constraints; but like Robin I 
share a preference for small, incremental changes.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 16:50:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:44:31 UTC