RE: Suggested response to the Yandex "cannot iive with loosening of TAG participation requiremens"

From: chaals@yandex-team.ru [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 1:39 AM
To: Stephen Zilles; public-w3process@w3.org
Subject: Re: Suggested response to the Yandex "cannot iive with loosening of TAG participation requiremens"

For what it's worth, I think this background framing is pretty inaccurate :(

13.04.2015, 00:44, "Stephen Zilles" <szilles@adobe.com<mailto:szilles@adobe.com>>:

The Process Document Task Force held a Call for Consensus (CfC) [1] to change the TAG participation rules in Process 2015. The result of this call [2] was positive in favor of the change (see below).
With some exceptions…
[SZ] As noted in the next paragraph. You did make the same comments during the CfC and I apologize for not mentioning that. It seemed to me that your objection was adequate to express the exception.


[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Nov/0163.html


[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Dec/0036.html


Yandex, via Chaals, objected [3] to this change and has proposed [4] an alternative set of changes to the TAG. With one exception, there was not a lot of support for these changes in the discussion that took place, both on this list and on the AC-Forum list.

[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/att-0101/00-part


[4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Mar/0029.html

For the most part there was little dissent - a couple of points attracted some dissent.
[SZ] It seems to me there was even less support for the proposal than there was dissent.

Chaals has indicated [5] that he does not have another solution to finding a change that would satisfy both Yandex and the proposers of the change to TAG participation that is currently in the Draft Process 2015 document, but he indicated that if this is what the AC wants he could probably live with the change.
I did not indicate the latter, and I am not sure where in those minutes you conclude that I did…
[SZ] This may be a faulty memory on my part. You did say, “Why should the AB decide an issue which is for the AC?” (per the minutes) and I assumed that having suggested that you would be willing to live with the result of such a ballot. If not, there is not much purpose in balloting the two alternatives.

He suggested balloting the AC to determine their desires.

[5] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/07-w3process-minutes.html



Yes.



--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru> - - - Find more at http://yandex.com