Minutes: W3C Process CG Telecon 28 January 2026

Summary of Resolutions and actions:

* Close issue 1033

Full minutes: https://www.w3.org/2026/01/28-w3process-minutes
And also pasted below for search.

Ian

====
Attendees: Brent Zundel (Chair), Ian Jacobs, Ted Thibodeau, François Daoust

Contents

1. Agenda+
2. Pull requests
3. Propose to close issues
5. Next meeting

Meeting minutes

Agenda+

[12]w3c/process#698

[12] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/698

<brent> Github: [13]w3c/process#698

[13] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/698

Brent: The AB has resolved to be transparent about election
results, and the TAG will go along with the AB

Ian: I help the Solid CG run this type of election

Brent: Anonymization is of voter, not candidate.

Ian: Ah.

Ian: Does this mean proc doc change?

Brent: Yes, I think so.

TallTed: It needs to be clear that no info is released until
all votes are in.

Brent: Any concerns from those here today about this proposal?

(No concerns heard)

Brent: So this will lead to a change in the election section of
the process document for the TAG and AB

Francois: We'll also need to update the Guide as well, which
has details on running elections.

[14]https://github.com/w3c/process/pulls

[14] https://github.com/w3c/process/pulls

Pull requests

[15]w3c/process#1021

[15] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1021

<brent> Github: [16]w3c/process#1021

[16] https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1021

Ian: I still have concerns about confusion with the Board
because it is the role of the Board to provide guidance on
issues of strategy, management, legal.

Brent: I don't think it's inappropriate for the AB to comment
on those topics as well (e.g., "tooling would be helpful here")

Francois: The current PR text doesn't shock me.
… note also that there is a difference between "corporate
strategy" and "technology strategy"

Brent: And AB is participating in strategic initiatives.

Brent: Because the AB is more vocal and active, it's important
to have mission guidance.

Ian: Friendly amendment. "On technical matters" would
distinguish between the AB and the Board.
… Maybe "issues that arise in the course described in this
Process document".
… but that could be too narrow. E.g., Process does not include
community groups

Ian: How about: "..ongoing guidance to the Team on issues that
arise during the course of community activities regarding
strategy, ...."

(We look at "Has responsibility for the Process Document")

Ian: +1 to has responsibility

<tidoust> +1

TallTed: My sense is that the word choice debate is about "too
much power" or "too little power."

Brent: Section 10 makes clear how the AB manages the process
document

Ian: Let's hear on the thread if people support "has
responsibility for"

propose to close issues

[17]w3c/process#1033

[17] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/1033

<brent> Github: [18]w3c/process#1033

[18] https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/1033

Ian: I'm hearing the premise ("short term ok") was challenged
but there's no consensus on how to change it. Can we close it?

Brent: I think closing it makes sense.

Francois: +1 to close

TallTed: +1 to close

Brent: And Florian supports closing it

Ian: It appears we already agreed to close :) => Process CG
agreed to close during the 2025-10-08 meeting.

Brent: That was the pull request; this is the issue

next meeting

Brent: Normally scheduled for 11 Feb. Ian has sent regrets
… I will poll people to see.


Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
[19]scribe.perl version 248 (Mon Oct 27 20:04:16 2025 UTC).

[19] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/concerts/concerns

All speakers: Brent, Francois, Ian, TallTed

Active on IRC: brent, Ian, tidoust




--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel: +1 917 450 8783

Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2026 18:22:01 UTC