- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 10:19:17 +0200
- To: "FUNAHASHI Yosuke" <yfuna@tomo-digi.co.jp>, "Kazuyuki Ashimura" <ashimura@w3.org>
- Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:16:44 +0200, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org> wrote: > On 09/24/2010 02:05 AM, FUNAHASHI Yosuke wrote: >> On 2010/09/23, at 2:02, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:01:13 -0400, FUNAHASHI Yosuke > 3. IG Participation (public vs. member restricted) > --------------------------------------------------- > >>>> * the IG should be public or W3C members only? >>>> >>>> I remember that, in the workshop, someone said that "Interest Group >>>> could be public" but the other person said that "Interest Group also >>>> requires W3C membership to participate in it". >>> >>> An interest group can be open to anyone - and indeed the charter >>> proposal allows anyone to join the interest group. But any work to be >>> done would happen in a working group (either new or existing). (Working groups generally require people to be from a W3C member, although exceptions can be made for experts whose employer is not reasonably able to join W3C - where reasonable is decided by W3C, so Sony is likely to be considered able, but the non-profit 6-member Madrid Association of disabled TV Users** would be considered unable to join) **I made this organisation up as an example. I don't know of such a thing, although it might exist. >>> There is a separate question about whether the work should take place >>> in public, or in a member-only group. For the Interest Group I think >>> it is much more effective for discussions to be in public. In any >>> case, this is important to make technical work more efficient. > > Please remember there are several ways of participation, i.e., email > discussion, telephone conference and f2f meeting. So theoretically, > there are several possible ways for public participation in an IG (or > even an WG) including: > > Possibility1: The public can join the email discussion and also join > the f2f/telephone meetings. > > Possibility2: The public can join the email discussion but cannot > join the f2f or telephone meetings. > > We need to clarify which style we would use for this IG. The charter as written assumes there will not normally be teleconferences, and that face to face meetings can be held, but any decisiosn made are subject to review by email, to ensure people unable to be present are not excluded from the decision-making process. This is the model used in groups such as the Web Applications Working Group and the HTML Working Group, and I think it is a good model for a broad-based Interest Group such as this one. It does allow for meetings (e.g. the planned workshop in Europe) and for teleconferences (e.g. if there is a topic we think can be usefully explained in a teleconference) but recognises that they are difficult to plan in such a way that all important stakeholders can be present. I will adjust the text of the decision-making policy section to clarify this. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Monday, 27 September 2010 08:20:30 UTC