Re: Webex details for Process Task Force

On 6/26/2015 9:56 AM, Wayne Carr wrote:
> I thought it was a third :)
> Each of the Process CG and AB Task Force that works with the CG should 
> switch to GitHub issues as a way to make decisions - so each have 
> their own separate GitHub repository and use Issues instead of phone 
> calls.  As I understood it, the phone calls were the AB Task Force, 
> not the CG.   The AB Task Force controlled what was actually proposed 
> (to the full AB I assume, but eventually to the AC), not the Process 
> CG.  So, I don't think there has been any delegation to the CG, just a 
> discussion in the CG.

No, there was no AB task force.  There were no AB phone calls to develop 
Process2015, only weekly CG phone calls.

For Process2015 the AB delegated to the CG to use an open process to 
recommend Process2015.  The AB maintained decision authority (that it 
has from the W3C Process) to choose whether or not to adopt the CG 
recommendations (which it did), and then it used the output of the CG 
process to formally take the document for AC approval.  The AC ballot 
resulted in 4 formal objections which the Director is currently thinking 

> The AC could use GitHub as well, for the same reasons.  Given the AC 
> mail list is member confidential, they'd need a private, 
> organizational GitHub repository limited to W3C Member accounts.
> One issue with that is
> On 2015-06-26 06:01, Jeff Jaffe wrote:
>> Mike,
>> It's not clear to me which question you are asking.
>> 1. One interpretation is that the AB has previously delegated its 
>> formal process revision responsibility to the CG under a task force 
>> led by Steve Zilles - and you are suggesting that the AB revoke that 
>> formal delegation - instead managing the formal process revision 
>> directly and using GitHub as a means for the community to 
>> collaboratively edit the process and prepare new revisions.  If that 
>> is your intent, we can certainly ask the AB at its July call.
>> 2. A second interpretation is that you want to keep the AB delegation 
>> to the CG, but are recommending that the CG use a different set of 
>> tools to propose revisions.  In that case, the CG would need to reach 
>> consensus, and the opinions of the task force Chair (Steve), document 
>> editor (Chaals McCathie Nevile), and CG Chair (Chaals McCathie 
>> Nevile) would be influential.
>> Jeff
>> On 6/25/2015 9:23 PM, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>>> > weekly Process Task Force,
>>> I'd like to discuss whether the demise of Zakim is a good 
>>> opportunity to retire this call and find a better way of 
>>> collaborating on process revision.
>>> The trend is to use GitHub to collaboratively edit specs and its 
>>> issues tracker rather than unstructured email threads to resolve 
>>> issues. I believe the Process CG and the AB task force should eat 
>>> this dog food and get away from conference calls as its discussion 
>>> and decision making mode.
>>> Anyone disagree? assuming so, where do we have the conversation and 
>>> resolve the issue?
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> From: Maria Auday <>
>>> Sent: 6/25/2015 2:58 PM
>>> To: <>
>>> Cc: Jeff Jaffe <>
>>> Subject: Webex details for Process Task Force
>>> Hello,
>>> Below are the Webex details for the weekly Process Task Force, 
>>> effective 30 June. Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>> Topic: Process Task Force
>>> Date: From Tuesday, June 30, 2015, to no end date
>>> Time: 10:00 am, Eastern Daylight Time (New York, GMT-04:00)
>>> Dial-in: +1-617-324-0000
>>> Access code: 641 501 274
>>> Meeting number: 641 501 274
>>> Meeting password: process
>>> Host key: 628756
>>> Regards,
>>> Maria
>>> ---
>>> Maria Auday
>>> Executive Assistant to Dr. Jeffrey Jaffe, CEO
>>> W3C, World Wide Web Consortium at MIT
>>> Phone: +1.617.324.0368

Received on Friday, 26 June 2015 14:18:09 UTC