Revising Appeals of Directors Decisions following an AC Review, Part 1 of 2

The following changes are part of a (two part) set of changes to finish a revision of the W3C Appeals Process to address comments received and accepted in the Review of Process 2015. The other part will come, later, by separate e-mail.


7.2 Appeal by Advisory Committee Representatives



Process2016; "When Advisory Committee review immediately precedes a decision, Advisory Committee representatives may only appeal when there is dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent>."


REPLACEMENT: "When a W3C decision is made following an Advisory Committee review<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACReview> of a proposal, Advisory Committee representatives MAY initiate an Advisory Committee appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal>.

As noted below, this simplifies the process by removing (an apparently unnecessary) constraint: the requirement for "dissent." The requirement for endorsement of an appeal request by 5% of the Membership is already a very strong constraint on frivolous appeals. The only major down side is the need to wait 3 weeks to see if an appeal attempt is made, but many W3C decisions require time to implement anyway.

Similar changes (all simpler than those proposed on 13 Jul 2015[1] to deal with issues 164, 165 and 167) must be made in the following sections:
[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Jul/0027.html


6.4 Candidate Recommendation



If there was any dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent> to the Working Group decision to request advancement Advisory Committee<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#AC> representatives may appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> the decision to advance the technical report.



REPLACEMENT: "The Advisory Committee representatives MAY initiate an Advisory Committee appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> to the W3C Decision to advance the technical report."

[Clean-up, Issue-164<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/164>][Revision above]



6.6 W3C Recommendation



  *   If there was any dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent> in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director must publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the general public, and must formally address<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#formal-address> the comment at least 14 days before publication as a W3C Recommendation. In this case the Advisory Committee<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#AC> may appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> the decision,



REPLACEMENT: "*     If there was any dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent> in the Advisory Committee review<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACReview>, the Director MUST publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the general public, and MUST formally address<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#formal-address> the comment at least 14 days before publication as a W3C Recommendation.

*           The Advisory Committee representatives may initiate an Advisory Committee Appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> to the W3C Decision."

[Clean-up, Issue-164<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/164>] [Rejection with Positive Reviews, Issue-167<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/167>][Revision above][Note this text differs slightly from David Singers "roll-up" to be consistent across the document.]



6.9 Obsoleting or Rescinding a W3C Recommendation [Per David Singer's "roll-up" on 5/13/2016]



[Text to replace from David Singer's suggested changes to section 6.9
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2016Jul/0011.html

The replacement text has the relevant link URLs and matches the text in part 2, forthcoming.]

If there is any dissent in the Advisory Committee review, the Director must publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the public, and must formally address the comment at least 14 days before any publication as a Retired Recommendation. The Advisory Committee may appeal the Director's decision.



REPLACEMENT: "*     If there was any dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent> in the Advisory Committee review<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACReview>, the Director MUST publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the general public, and MUST formally address<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#formal-address> the comment at least 14 days before publication as a Retired Recommendation. The Advisory Committee representatives may initiate an Advisory Committee Appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> to the W3C Decision."

[Clean-up, Issue-164<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/164>] [Rejection with Positive Reviews, Issue-167<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/167>][Revision above]



11 Process Evolution



1.    After the Advisory Committee review<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACReviewAfter>, if there is consensus, the Team enacts the new process officially by announcing the W3C decision<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-w3c-decision> to the Advisory Committee. If there was dissent<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#def-Dissent>, Advisory Committee representatives may appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> the decision.



REPLACEMENT: "... to the Advisory Committee. Advisory Committee representatives MAY initiate an Advisory Committee appeal<http://www.w3.org/2015/04/Process-20150428/#ACAppeal> to the W3C.

[Clean-up, Issue-164<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/164>][Revision above]


Steve Z