Re: ISSUE-133 - TAG role / makeup

On 3/10/15 1:57 AM, wrote:
> <>
> We have made a change to this in the draft Process 2015, loosening the constraint for people who are hired by a company that already has a member.
> I propose a rather more substantial set of changes:
> - TAG has 12 members, including TimBL, 3 nominated by the Director, 9 elected by the membership.
> - The chair(s) must be chosen from among TAG members, by the Director.
> - The TAG are elected by "Schulze-STV" (rather than the current system), 4 or 5 per year like the AB.
> - Any number of employees of a member can be nominated, however only the one who is most preferred can take a seat. The others will be eliminated with the seats going to the next-most preferred candidate(s).
> - A W3C member who employs a member of the TAG *must not* nominate another person for election.
> - TAG members participate as representatives of their employer, for Patent Policy purposes. The Process already says this, but the current TAG charter which cannot override Process gives a different impression - this is affirming that the charter should be changed.

These changes, including the clarifications that resulted from DavidB's 
comments [1], seem like good steps to me.

I could also live with the change Peter proposes in [2] (`who` actually 
nominates a candidate seems <<< important than the quality of the 
candidates i.e. I support less restrictions in the nomination step).

(I still think the benefits of using the WG structure for the scope of 
`Web architecture` outweigh the overhead of creating a one-off group 
with special process handling in the PD. But, I'll save that for another 
day ;-).)

-Thanks, AB


Received on Tuesday, 10 March 2015 10:46:35 UTC