- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 10:22:03 -0500
- To: public-w3process@w3.org
Summary of Resolutions: * Mark the following process issues as “Proposed to close”: 921, 928 https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/921 https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/928 * Close issue 521 after the AB-public repo issue has been created and the notes from this meeting appear in the process repo https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/521 * Remove “proposed to close” label from 639 https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/639 Full minutes: https://www.w3.org/2025/08/27-w3process-minutes.html And also pasted below for search... ======================================================================= Revising W3C Process Community Group 27 August 2025 [2]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/2025/08/27-w3process-irc Attendees Present Alan Law, Brent Zundel (Chair), Ian Jacobs (Scribe), Philippe Le Hégaret, Ted Tibodeau, François Daoust Regrets - Chair - Scribe Ian Contents 1. [3]Welcome 2. [4]Plan for TPAC 3. [5]Open Process PRS 1. [6]w3c/process#888 4. [7]Process Issue Triage 5. [8]Editor role 6. [9]Summary of action items 7. [10]Summary of resolutions Meeting minutes Welcome Brent: Welcome all! Brent: Today we'll look at [11]open pull requests. We'll begin look at triaging open issues. Let's do some introductions. I was recently elected to the AB and will be chairing this group. … I appreciate the W3C process and look forward to shepherding it in this new role [11] https://github.com/w3c/process/pulls PLH: I am responsible for tech strategy at W3C. I have a love/hate relationship with the process. … I'll be co-chairing this group with Brent TallTed: I have been doing w3c things since 2001. I am particularly interested in the use of language. Alan: I'm a business owner in the UK; I am interested in how the Web and W3C work; I am new to this. … I see lots of problems with the Internet of today and would like to see if I can help out. … and hope to meet the people who get the work done. <plh> Ian: I first started to work on the process document 28 yeasr ago. I'm running the community group program. <plh> ... which has its own process <plh> ... I think our working group process should be overalled, to be healthy. it's challenging for new comers. New CG process is 7 pages. Brent: In the AB I have heard the same sentiment in reformulating the process to simplify. tidoust: Have been at W3C for 17 years. I have developed tools to help groups get work done. … I am the new W3C Process/Project director at W3C … I'll start by learning and observing Plan for TPAC Brent: We're not planning to meet as a CG at TPAC … however, the AB is planning to attend lots of WG meetings during the week to ask questions about process experiences and frustrations. … I anticipate the results of that outreach will be shared here. Ian: When will the AB reach out? Brent: We are discussing that at our meeting tomorrow. Ian: Some suggestions for outreach during TPAC: (1) Chairs breakfast (2) Breakout session. Brent: Good ideas PLH: I think I'm responsible for organizing the chairs breakfast. Brent: I'll coordinate with Philippe about what to discuss during the chairs breakfast ACTION: PLH to ask Alex to add the Chairs breakfast to the TPAC meeting calendar Open Process PRS Brent: Say "merge", "continue", or "close" [12]w3c/process#888 [12] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/888 <brent> Github: [13]w3c/process#888 [13] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/888 PLH: We have a "Needs AB feedback" label [We review the background of the pull request] Brent: I'm hearing it's not ready to merge; we need more AB and TAG feedback. <brent> Github: [14]w3c/process#929 [14] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/929 Brent: My observation is that there's not yet consensus to address the topic through this pull request. … see issue 921 [15]w3c/process#921 [15] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/921 [16]w3c/process#921 [16] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/921 Brent: On that issue I'm not seeing discussion arrive at a point where people are clearly saying "here's what we should do." PLH: I think this PR is wrong on several grounds. Of the AC wants to nominate someone on the Team to be on the AC, they should be able to do so, and if the AC as a whole wants them in, they should be able to elect them. … a second question is whether the Team should be able to nominate someone from the Team, but those nominations are also subject to approval outside the team. … so I don't think we need to constrain these choices. … also, this has not been a problem ever. We have more important things to fix in the process. Ian: +1 to addressing the question of balance of power in a process overhaul. Don't need to address it at this time. Brent: In light of discussion today, I would like to put "Propose to close" and see who argues against this. … this conversation will be added to the PR. RESOLUTION: Mark this as proposed to close <brent> Github: [17]w3c/process#928 [17] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/928 Brent: This proposal limits people from participating in different governance bodies at the same time. PLH: As a reminder, this situation has arisen a couple of times. Brent: This also fits into the broader question of how powers and responsibilities are balanced Ian: There's active opposition to this pull request. Brent: I also think "Propose to close" is appropriate and conversation should move back to the AB Ian: I am hearing that there is support for addressing the concerns that were raised, but in a holistic fashion and that may lead to other pull requests. Brent: Right, the conversation needs to continue and this PR is not the place for it to continue RESOLUTION: Mark this as proposed to close Process Issue Triage <brent> Github: [18]w3c/process#521 [18] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/521 Brent: The AB would like to know the experiment results, but I don't think that issue needs to be tracked in this issue. IJ: Closing it here seems fine; with a pointer to wherever it will be tracked Brent: We have the AB public issue tracker. ACTION: Brent to open an issue in the AB-public repo for the transfer of the approval voting issue out of the process repo RESOLUTION: Close issue 521 after the AB-public repo issue has been created and the notes from this meeting appear in the process repo <brent> Github: [19]w3c/process#639 [19] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/639 Ian: I think the AB should review this whole mechanism before addressing an issue that is an abstract question. Brent: That's a good question, but the issue is saying "Since they do exist...let's examine this topic" PLH: We ended up simplifying the submission process. It's hard to remember the rationale for the appeal … I'd be in favor of allowing others from the AC to appeal Brent: I am hearing that we should not close this issue. RESOLUTION: Remove the "propose to close" issue <brent> Github: [20]w3c/process#402 [20] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/402 PLH: It seems broken to me that the only way to know whether a CR is going to Rec or not, you likely have to look at the group charter. Brent: I am hearing there might be some changes to the process to help clarify the end state. Ian: How big a part of the AB conversation is the "maturity level communication" topic? Brent: Too soon to tell. Ian: Suggest going big here and talking to other orgs and entities (e.g., [21]WHATWG, [22]ECMA TC39, [23]Federated Identity CG/WG) to see what they are doing, and if possible, align with them, which would benefit the whole community. [21] https://whatwg.org/stages [22] https://tc39.es/process-document/ [23] https://github.com/w3c-fedid/Administration/blob/main/proposals-CG-WG.md Brent: I think that's how the AB is thinking. Editor role Brent: I will try to get more people from the AB to this CG, and we'll need a new co-editor in light of Elika's moving on. … Florian will remain a co-editor Summary of action items 1. [24]PLH to ask Alex to add the Chairs breakfast to the TPAC meeting calendar 2. [25]Brent to open an issue in the AB-public repo for the transfer of the approval voting issue out of the process repo Summary of resolutions 1. [26]Mark this as proposed to close 2. [27]Mark this as proposed to close 3. [28]Close issue 521 after the AB-public repo issue has been created and the notes from this meeting appear in the process repo 4. [29]Remove the "propose to close" issue Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by [30]scribe.perl version 244 (Thu Feb 27 01:23:09 2025 UTC). [30] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 917 450 8783
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2025 15:22:15 UTC