Re: Role of W3C [was: Concerns...]

Hello, Karen,

I am not sure of the goal of your questions. Feel free to contact me directly if you would like to provide more perspective. I can answer your specific questions:

Yes, we regularly discuss the role of W3C with Members. Twice a year we try to have one-on-one discussions with each Full Member and others that we can fit in.

The W3C Advisory Committee ("AC") includes a representative from every W3C Member organization. The AC meets twice a year. And currently there are monthly AC meetings. [AC]

W3C has an Advisory Board that meets twice a month. [AB]

There is also an active discussion on GitHub about W3C role -- or vision or mission -- I can't remember right now and I don't find it from short search.

We have done some surveys, mostly as part of website redesign processes in 2017 and in 2020. [surveys]

I hope that info helps.

Best,
~Shawn
<http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/>


I'm not sure if these provide the best, current information? It's what I am up for on a Friday afternoon after a very long week and month.
[AB] https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB
[AC] https://www.w3.org/wiki/AdvisoryCommittee

[surveys] For example, a survey related to brand and identity, and documenting "user stories" - announced here: https://www.w3.org/blog/2020/04/w3c-website-redesign-user-stories-brand-and-identity/

---

On 28-May-21 1:45 PM, John Foliot wrote:
> Hi Karen,
> 
> I certainly have thoughts and opinions <grin>, and I've been knocking about at the W3C for more than a decade, but I'd prefer to defer voicing more of my opinions here - I believe the questions you raise are valid, and perhaps Shawn or W3M (W3C Management) should weigh in here.
> 
> I am aware of the perception that the W3C is some kind of "police" (IMHO a completely false assumption), but I also note that it is *my perception* that in the WAI domain, we seemingly have a larger-than-usual number of "Invited Experts" and participants who are here for "accessibility" first, standards second. I don't have an answer to that.
> 
> I'm a huge fan standards driving progress, but to be clear, we create 'standards' not 'LAWS', and just because we get a standard published in no way means that it becomes 'gospel' - in fact there is a (disappointing at times) history at the W3C of really cool specs that could benefit accessibility that go nowhere (example: https://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/>).
> 
> JF
> 
> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 1:01 PM Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net <mailto:klewellen@shellworld.net>> wrote:
> 
>     wow, thanks for this John.
>     I admit though it generates a question.
>     Has anyone ever surveyed what  the general public, or even members believe
>     the role of the w3c to be?
>     I ask because there are so many environments where the name gets invoked,
>     so  many ways rules are used that I imagine there is confusion about the
>     things you note here.
>     as a reporter, I have come across the w3c described as the Internet police
>     more than once.
>     Thoughts on image and perception?
>     Karen
> 
> 
> 
>     On Fri, 28 May 2021, John Foliot wrote:
> 
>      > Hi All,
>      >
>      > +1 to Patrick Lauke. Am I the only one struck by the (it's more than just)
>      > irony of a group that ostensibly promotes inclusion of all kinds, actively
>      > discussing excluding a company from W3C participation? (And, a quick check
>      > at https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List#xA <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List#xA> confirms they are indeed
>      > members already.)
>      >
>      > I get it. This company has a well deserved reputation of activity that many
>      > of us find... troubling. I too have signed Karl's Overlay Factsheet, and
>      > I've publicly pointed at this company as being untruthful and snake-oil
>      > salesmen (using those exact words). I'm not a fan of their technology
>      > "solution" as it adds as much grief as it claims to remove.
>      >
>      > But it's critical to remember that the W3C is a member-funder,
>      > international standards organization - and a consortium that does more than
>      > just work on standards for digital accessibility. (The member-funded part
>      > is critical - it costs $$ to keep the lights on, and that money has to come
>      > from somewhere.) The W3C has members from around the world, of all forms of
>      > political stripes and business models, and it's important to note that a
>      > LOT of entities join the W3C with little active participation in specific
>      > activities. Their reasons for joining the W3C are as varied as the members
>      > themselves. Additionally, the W3C has absolutely no power to *force* member
>      > companies to follow or adopt W3C standards (because otherwise, Apple would
>      > support @longdesc in their tooling stack - for example...) Finally, there
>      > are valuable Accessibility advocates (warriors) producing great digital
>      > accessibility work today that are NOT members of the W3C for reasons that
>      > may or may-not have anything to do with "accessibility" (WebAIM, FUNKA).
>      > W3C membership is NOT a badge that separates "us" from "them".
>      >
>      > The consortium is NOT a members-only country club, it's NOT a
>      > by-invitation-only collection of monoculture businesses, advocates, and
>      > other stakeholders (EDU, government, etc.), and as disappointing it may be
>      > to see a company that many of us have serious reservations about actively
>      > seeking to participate at the W3C, I for one would fight tooth and nail to
>      > ensure their right to do so remained in place. It may turn out positively,
>      > it may turn out negatively, but frankly I'm offended that some would even
>      > contemplate actively slamming the door in their face simply because they
>      > don't see things the way *we* see them.
>      >
>      > IMHO, it's the antithesis of inclusion.
>      >
>      > JF
>      >
>      >
>      > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 4:52 PM Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org <mailto:shawn@w3.org>> wrote:
>      >
>      >> Hi, Karen,
>      >>
>      >> The Code document includes some of that information directly and links to
>      >> other:
>      >>
>      >> * Section 4: Reporting Violations and Supporting the Code
>      >> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/#Reporting <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/#Reporting>
>      >>
>      >> * "Procedures" in Positive Work Environment Home Page
>      >> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/ <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/pwe/>
>      >>
>      >> Best,
>      >> ~Shawn
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> On 27-May-21 3:39 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>      >>> I can respect your stance.
>      >>> may I ask how the w3c insures anyone complies with this code of ethics?
>      >>> By which I mean, is it possible to join, yet engage in the sorts of
>      >> behavior illustrated by some posts here,  without  anyone the wiser?
>      >>> Thanks,
>      >>> Karen,
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>> On Thu, 27 May 2021, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>      >>>
>      >>>> I actually have concerns about this discussion. I'm sure going over the
>      >> list of current members https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List> each of
>      >> us can find at least one or two current members that don't, in our view,
>      >> fit our view of a good actor - maybe they are in the cryptocurrency market,
>      >> or maybe they're tied to a media company heavily invested in embedding DRM
>      >> schemes into standards, or maybe they're tied to a particular government
>      >> body that is actively working on the suppression of free speech, or ...
>      >>>>
>      >>>> However, under the rules, as long as they behave in accordance with the
>      >> membership agreement, and follow the code of ethics and professional
>      >> conduct https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/> (and as long as they pay
>      >> their membership fees), they are free to join.
>      >>>>
>      >>>> P
>      >>>> --
>      >>>> Patrick H. Lauke
>      >>>>
>      >>>> https: //www.splintered.co.uk/ <http://www.splintered.co.uk/> | https://github.com/patrickhlauke <https://github.com/patrickhlauke>
>      >>>> https: //flickr.com/photos/redux/ <http://flickr.com/photos/redux/> | https://www.deviantart.com/redux <https://www.deviantart.com/redux>
>      >>>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>      >>>>
>      >>>>
>      >>>>
>      >>>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >
>      > --
>      > *John Foliot* | Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility
>      >
>      > "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
>      > Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
>      >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> *John Foliot* | Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility
> 
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." - Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"

Received on Friday, 28 May 2021 19:55:53 UTC