- From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:50:55 +0900
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>, Advisory Board <ab@w3.org>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAF_7JxCZC2RK4XA03cencdq1YTy_8zyvpUpP4z7aoOd+OjEsmw@mail.gmail.com>
> TAG F2F to present the Director-free Process proposal. Where would one find the proposal? Thanks, -- Pierre On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:50 AM fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On Thursday several members of the AB (dsinger, Florian, cwilso, fantasai, > and > Jeff) joined the TAG F2F to present the Director-free Process proposal. > > These are the resolutions of the TAG on this topic, for consideration by > the > Process CG and AB (slightly reworded from the whiteboard for clarity). > > Topic: TAG Appointment Committee > > RESOLVED: Team participant should be a "non-voting" Staff Contact role, > but can break ties in votes if the committee takes any votes. > > RESOLVED: If committee can't make an appointment in time, Team will > appoint, > but for Team appointments the term is only 1 year. > > RESOLVED: TAG Appointment Committee should be larger. Prefer 11 members > consisting of 10 "voting" members + 1 staff contact, following > IETF(?) precedent. Given a division of members into Chairs and > TAG members, suggest 3 TAG members and 7 chairs. > > RESOLVED: Randomly select from pool, then check whether willing to > volunteer > (rather than asking for volunteers first, then randomly > selecting > from reduced pool). Rationale: likely to yield broader > membership > > -> Please find a way to represent the Web developer community. > -> Restrict membership to not more than 1 member per company. > -> Make lists of candidates from which members are selected public. > > > Topic: W3C Objection Decision Council > > RESOLVED: Council should pick its own chair, per issue, by consensus, > falling back to a vote if that fails. (Goal is to choose a > neutral chair for the topic.) > > RESOLVED: Chair must be a member of the Council > > RESOLVED: If FO not resolved in X days, chair MUST report status to AC. > Report MAY be public. Suggest 90 < X < 180. > > RESOLVED: TAG supports that full Council must issue the conclusion, > even if smaller ad-hoc task forces are formed to do work. > > RESOLVED: No separately elected council. W3C Council as AB+TAG is good. > > RESOLVED: Council participation cannot require F2F participation. > > RESOLVED: Membership of Council for a particular issue should be fixed > at formation, not changed by elections. Recusal/withdrawals > allowed, but if membership drops below some minimum threshold, > council for that issue should be reformed. > > -> Discussed whether council's majority / minority opinions MAY, MUST, > or MUST NOT be signed. No conclusions yet. > -> Discussed whether percentage of support for position should be reported, > but no conclusions yet. (Somewhat dependent on previous point.) > > ~fantasai > >
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2019 00:51:33 UTC