Re: chairing the solid CG -- any takers?

Hi Melvin,

Good questions. On the practical side, I think Sarven is looking for tools
we can use for the election process. I think the charter says we will have
3 chairs (or less than that if there are not enough candidates).

Once Sarven announces the process I also plan to volunteer as one of the
candidates!

Whereas a lot of Solid-related activity can also happen without links to
the W3C context (e.g. using independently organised meet-ups and forums,
facilitated by random volunteers, by the Solid Team, or by specific tech
vendors, consortia, etc) I do think it’s important we keep this CG going,
as an incubation ground (spec drafting, implementations, experimentation,
test suite development) for all Solid-related spec features before they are
ready to move to WG level.

There’s nothing wrong with activity also happening at other CGs, or outside
W3C altogether, and it’s good if components of Solid (e.g. WebID) are
modular enough to be an independent thing, but it’s nice if we as a
community strive to keep one dedicated place where tech vendors can go to
help incubate Solid-specific spec features, and I would love to get a
chance to contribute to that.

But let’s wait for Sarven to announce the process and then we’ll take it
from there!


Cheers,
Michiel de Jong
Director
Ponder Source Foundation

On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 06:44, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

> There was a discussion lately around charing the solid CG
>
> I also believe some of the current proposals are, "ridiculously
> bureaucratic", to quote from the discussion
>
>
> https://github.com/solid/specification/commit/70ee5206421614149ad78cc1ba9cab42aaaa6ddf#diff-faf482a7253376d87c21cb88f28f9b74706251f790f6e3b237e23ed8561898caR102
>
> Quote:
>
> * TBL: Can you explain why you have to have an election if there is only
> one candidate?
> * SC: Because it's part of the agreement we have on the charter.
> * TBL: Ridiculously bureaucratic. When you're looking for people to ???
> it's often hard to find people.
>
> Also
>
> * TBL: Is anybody on this call who thinks they might be interested?
> * VB: [crickets]
> * VB: Maybe some people are building suspense.
>
> Could we simply ask who is willing to chair the group at this point?
>
> If it's only one person and there are no objections, I dont think we need
> an election.
>
> It's unclear whether Eric put himself forward, but if so, we would be
> lucky to have someone of his expertise and knowledge, so let me second that
> suggestion.
>
> If anyone wishes to chair the group, could the simply make themselves
> known, if there are fewer than 5, we could avoid a lot of needless
> bureaucracy.
>