Re: Charter Change should not be avoided if needed

Le 05/02/2018 à 18:38, McCloy-Kelley, Liisa a écrit :

> 1- Why do you say “the SC has to be deeply reformed or better, dropped” – what is wrong with having a steering committee that is a liaison group that ensures the work is coordinated?

  a. the SC, as it is chartered now, *violates* the W3C BG Process.
     The SC *cannot* be "empowered to take any decision on behalf of
     the BG", it's just strictly forbidden by a "must not".

  b. the SC is "steering" because it's "empowered to...". The name is
     pointless and meaningless without it.

  c. do we really need a liaison subgroup in the BG while the whole BG
     itself is supposed to provide guidance to the various Groups, ie.
     be that liaison group between the Groups, the Industry and the W3C?

> 2- When you say “- I suggest to make EPUB3 CG chairs and PubWG chairs de facto members of the BG   - I suggest to make them formally liaise with and in the BG, through its Charter, and with W3C Staff in the loop.” Why do you think that isn’t already the case? 

Nothing in the 3 EPUB3 CG, Pub WG and PUB BG Charter says the co-chairs
are 'de facto' BG Members. Charters need to say it for Patent Policy
reasons. It _may_ happen all the current chairs are _at this moment_
in the BG. There is absolutely nothing ensuring it for the future.
We never build a Charter for now, the expectation is to use it at least
for a couple of years. (and that's one of the reasons why I said
long ago this BG's Charter was far too suboptimal).

> I’m not trying to pick a fight. I’m just trying to understand your position and your understanding of how the Business Group has been working.

No worries.

> I’m a new co-chair, trying to do right by the group and also trying to be true to some of the agreement that we had when initially forming the business group around making it a less formal environment that was an easier on-ramp for people into the W3C method of working. That doesn’t mean that every W3C rule gets ignored or that process shouldn’t be followed. It does mean that we give people a break and don’t scare them away and maybe we use Google Docs for collecting shared collaboration rather than GitHub. 

The agreements or discussions BEFORE THE MERGER are gone, Liisa. The
only things governing this BG are (in *decreasing* order of precedence):

  - the W3C Process
  - the W3C CG and BG Process
  - this Group's Charter
  - the W3C/IDPF merger agreement

Nothing else, sorry.

</Daniel>

Received on Monday, 5 February 2018 17:59:39 UTC