W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Chair's comment on charter renewal objection

From: イアンフェッティ <ifette@google.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 16:59:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CAF4kx8cifU1wCKJYuVnAwONDR4WOrpttm_WGVzoeCYqk-Ko77Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>
Cc: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>, Tracking Protection Working Group <public-tracking@w3.org>
Ralph,

Can you perhaps comment on why support for this objection is being
solicited in the form of emails to ac-forum rather than as a poll? Is this
common?

Peter,

Regardless of what happens with the formal appeal now making its way
through the process, I would encourage you to take it not as a personal
slight but rather a manifestation of a long-standing concern that has been
raised repeatedly within the group and underlies many of the discussions
the group has had and continues to have. I understand the desire to make
speedy progress towards a tangible result, but if people don't agree in
which direction we should be running it's unlikely we'll arrive at the
finish line as a group.

-Ian (as an individual)


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org> wrote:

> Peter wrote on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:42:05 -0800
> ...
> > Since Boston, we are working each week on text and specific action
> items.  I have contemplated narrowing the range of outstanding issues to
> get us to a good place ­ a realistic goal at the next face-to-face of
> having good text on each of the issues.  With the normal clean-up of
> wording, that puts us in the June/July time frame for Last Call, as
> contemplated in the new schedule.  The subsequent stages, as I understand
> it, are standard periods for receiving public comments, etc.
> >
> > This June/July timeframe is the exact schedule I spoke of with many of
> you when I agreed to come on board on the first place.  It is this
> timeframe to which we are working; and it is to this timeframe that I am
> devoting my full efforts this spring semester when I have no teaching
> obligations.
>
> And I thank you very much for that, Peter.
>
> >
> > Mr. Chapell's "request that further TPWG work cease" on all other issues
> is not the way to proceed.  The W3C will address his point separately.  We
> have work to do.  Let¹s do it on the timetable that we contemplated when I
> came aboard.
>
> W3C Process allows appeal of a Director's decision by an Advisory
> Committee representative.  I have been appointed by the Director to
> handle the processing of this appeal.  I have informed the Advisory
> Committee that we have received the appeal.  W3C Process requires that
> if 5% of the Advisory Committee support the appeal we then conduct a
> vote of the Advisory Committee on whether the decision to extend the
> charter is approved or rejected.
>
> The Advisory Committee has until 23:59 UTC next Tuesday to provide its
> input concerning the appeal.  I have no issue with the Working Group
> continuing with its deliberations while this appeal process progresses.
>
> Thank you for all your work on behalf of the Web Community.
>
> Regards,
> Ralph Swick, W3C COO
>
> >
> > Peter
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 01:00:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:07 UTC