Re: DRAFT Agenda for the Process Call Wednesday 14 Apr 7am PDT

I'm afraid I must offer my regrets for tomorrow's meeting.

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 5:31 PM David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

> Webex at <
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-w3process/2019May/0000.html>
>
> IRC is #w3process
>
> Log of prior meeting at <
> https://www.w3.org/2021/03/10-w3process-minutes.html>
>
> Usual meeting time: SECOND and FOURTH WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH AT 7AM
> PACIFIC. See <https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/w3process/calendar>
>
>
>
> Overall purpose: still trying to close down 2021
>
>
>
> 1) Assign scribe, etc.,
>
> 2) Agenda bash.
>
> 3) Status reports
>    3.1) PSIG Report. Do we need PP protection on Registry Definitions?
> Tooling considerations? Other take-aways from PSIG?
>    3.2) Editor report: what’s holding us back from sending to the AB so
> they can send it to the team and the AC?
>    3.3) I don’t see any recent Issues that should be triaged <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+created%3A%3E2021-03-10+
> >
>
> 4) Agenda+ <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/Agenda%2B> (I think
> they are mostly old, and should have the label removed)
>
>   4.1) Switching Tracks #509 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/509>
>
>    We need to land this
>
>   4.2) Define a role of "Alternate AC Rep" & enable them to perform AC
> duties when necessary #505 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/505>
>
>    Basic questions: we seem to want to do this; we seem to be willing to
> allow the team significant flexibility over what’s practical; and we’re not
> sure how much Process/Legal document impact there is. Next steps?
>
>   4.3) Define minutes #511 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/511>
> and <
> https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/122760-so-the-hours-are-pretty-good-then-he-resumed-the
> >
>
>     Previous discussion closed inconclusively, poor chairing.
>
>   4.4) Suspension / Removal for cause #312 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/312>
>
>    I added agenda+ but 3 weeks ago and no longer remember why
>
>   4.5) Improve AB Chairing text #514 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/514>
>
>     I think the AB has this in hand and I should have removed the agenda+
>
> 5) Pull Requests
>
>   5.1) New section on tooling #436 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/436>
>
>      Despite the heat and amount of discussion, I think we have settled on
> ‘must’ for only record-keeping, which is essential. Are we ready to Pull?
>
>   5.2) Make it clear than any decision can be objected to #299 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/299>
>
>      Do we need this text, or can we say nothing or something simpler? Or
> is the sentence at the beginning of 3.5 enough? <
> https://www.w3.org/2020/Process-20200915/#WGAppeals>
>      "Groups resolve issues through dialog. Individuals who disagree
> strongly with a decision should register with the Chair any Formal
> Objections (e.g., to a decision made as the result of a vote).”
>
>   5.3) Proposes changes to wide/horizontal review #401 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/401>
>
>      Significant text changes, and significant discussion, all dormant
> since July 2020. Not good.
>
>   5.4) Simplify the text on liaisons #433 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/433>
>
>      Again, dormant. This appears to be inline with our goal of
> simplification. Generally, once a liaison is established, there is a
> bi-directional right to attend meetings and be involved. Do we define this?
> Can we?
>
>   5.5) Meetings of new groups are 8 weeks from charter approval #434 <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/434>
>
>      Meetings, what are they? Leave hanging? Or can we resolve this while
> we are NOT under pressure of meetings?
>
> 6) Are we on for seeing the end of P2021?
>    6.1) Remaining P2021 Priority issues: <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/P2021%3A%20Priority> seems
> clean-ish.
>
>    6.2) Cherry-picked from the P2021 Milestone:
>       Also from AC Review
>       #347  Streamlining horizontal reviews <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/347>
>       #103  Should the process allow REC->WD transition directly? <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/103>
>
>       #60    Clarify the voting process AC-review (we’re never going to
> have a document that reflects reality, this is here just as a joke so we
> can all laugh or cry)
>
> 7) 10 Issues that  the AC gave us last time we asked for a review; we
> should probably try to clean up?  <
> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/labels/AC-review>
>
>
> The usual closers:
>
> 8) Next meeting.  28 April  but the chair may have trouble that week.
> 8) Any other business.
>
>
>
>
> Dave Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple
>
> singer@apple.com
>
>
>
>
>