Re: Make the TAG self-selected/elected? [Was: Re: TAG productivity, elections, and httpRange-14]

On 4/24/2012 8:22 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> Perhaps the TAG would be composed of more useful participants if its
> members were self-selected/elected i.e. anyone can be a member of the TAG?
>
> (I think that would be more consistent with IETF groups but I'm not
> positive on that.)

I think we're getting way ahead of ourselves. If the TAG is to be 
reconsidered at all, then I think the first thing to do is to look at the 
charter, and see whether we thing the mission in it remains appropriate. If 
so, then we need to look at the TAG as it has run for 10 years, and to 
evaluate what's worked and what hasn't. With that information in hand, we 
could start to evaluate proposals such as the one you make.

FWIW(speaking just for myself): >if< the goals of the TAG are to remain 
roughly as they have been, or at least as they've been interpreted in 
practice, I think self selection would be a disaster, for several reasons. 
In part because the TAG deals with so many long-running issues, it's 
collective memory is very important. The fact that the TAG is of bounded 
size is very important for it to do its work, for it to get a sense of 
cohension, and for us to develop the trust that's necessary for dealing 
with issues that may be very sensitive for the W3C or particular members. 
On the contrary, it's very often been crucial that Tim has been able to use 
his appointment power to ensure that the TAG has at least some of the 
particular skills and competence that we may not happen to pick up in any 
particular election.

I'm short of time this morning, and don't have the chance to give this the 
careful attention it deserves, but I strongly feel that we should not back 
into re-engineering the TAG in bits and pieces. If we want to reconsider 
it, then we should get the right people involved, starting with the AB and 
the team, we should take a very careful look at the charter and at the 
history of what's worked and what hasn't. Only then should we get serious 
about particular proposals for change, and those should be aimed at either 
giving the TAG different responsibilities, or in addressing problems we've 
had in fulfilling our existing responsibilities. Which should be clear 
which of those we're trying to do.

Also: the next 8 months turn out to be a really bad time for me personally 
to pick up extra TAG responsibilities. If this turns out to be when the W3C 
feels the TAG needs re-engineering, I will do my best as chair to 
participate and to help, but for me it might be easier in 2013.

Thank you.

Noah

Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 13:21:16 UTC