W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > December 2014

Limiting Charter extensions

From: GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 16:27:28 +0000
To: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, "chaals@yandex-team.ru" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "Carr, Wayne" <wayne.carr@intel.com>
Message-ID: <540E99C53248CE468F6F7702588ABA2AC7D8E94D@A1GTOEMBXV005.gto.a3c.atos.net>
I think that we are touching several topics here :

- limiting the group life extension, via charter extension, by director approval in the case of iso-scope (keep same perimeter, same team and just extend the time for delivering the promised stuff).
I heard here the idea to keep that possibility, but have a 2.5 to 3 years maximum, and let the AC control it.
-> Lets discuss the actual process change as suggested by Wayne http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Dec/att-0107/00-part

- facilitating the charter renewal when group scope and priorities are redesigned.
I heard from Daniel that it takes too long to renew charter, but it is not clear to me in that discussion which actual task is blocking the process, and makes it lasting several months.
-> I suggest we identify what is the best case scenario and try to include it in several area ?
(1) re-assessing in the process the milestones for charter renewal.
I guess mainly on http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#WGCharterDevelopment

(e.g.  if D is end of the group life : D-3 months, chair should make a call for charter renewal, D-2 months new charter to be presented to AC, D-1 month charter renewed approved, D old charter ends and new charter starts)
(2) reminding good practice in chair training
(3) other means/idea ?

Note that in that thread for reducing charter renewal timing, I heard a very tiny timing in Daniel proposal, like 2 weeks to allow AC to make their mind about the new scope of an existing WG. From my experience of AC rep, 2 weeks does not even let me contacting my legal to confirm my company participation to the group. It would imply that I could support a group charter, but I would get a no-go-for-IPR-reason after charter approval, and have my company not participating.

Virginie Galindo
Gemalto AC rep/ AB member
Twitter : @poulpita
 This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus.
Received on Monday, 22 December 2014 16:27:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:25 UTC