- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 16:49:27 -0700
- To: timeless@gmail.com
- Cc: public-w3process@w3.org
On Aug 25, 2014, at 16:11 , timeless@gmail.com wrote: >> I have been involved in elections with quorum requirements. >> Do we (w3c) have any now? > > ITS did [1]. > WCAG has a "chair defined quorum" line. > XForms markup thought it had a.m operative quorum requirement, but I can't find it. ** > QAWG draft did [2]. > SocialWeb [3] did (not sure what they are) > WebCGM (?) and WS and Mobile Web Best Practices, and TTML all seemed to fail some quorum requirements, WAI also seemed to fail > > ** we need to demand charters link for date versioned process documents!! Thanks. Yes, I think a lot of groups formally or informally take decisions made with only a small subset of the members as provisional; as far as I know, we don’t have formal votes where quorum is required (e.g. TAG election, AB election, and even for charters, the new threshold is only a ‘warning’). > > >> Even if we did, then some of the cases are covered by a simple failure to list a preference for some candidates (r.g. the quorum requirement that, to be elected, one has to receive yes votes from >Y% of the voting pool). > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/11/i18n-recharter/its-charter#voting > [2] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/01/qawgpd-20030103.html#sub1-2 > [3] http://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialWebTeleconferences > David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 25 August 2014 23:49:58 UTC