W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2014

Re: A proposal for revising the rules on TAG Participation

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 02:30:45 +0200
Cc: "Alex Russell" <slightlyoff@google.com>, "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, "Noah Mendelsohn" <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Message-ID: <op.xis41jr9y3oazb@chaals.local>
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 21:23:36 +0500, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>  

> I've been thinking about the recent controversy for the last few days. I  
> think there's merit on both sides of the question, but on balance it  
> seems that >the Web community might benefit if the rules on TAG  
> participation were somewhat relaxed. Specifically, I propose that the  
> following be considered for >the TAG (but not necessarily for the AB).  
> The essence of the change I propose is
> [...]
>> I would love to see a change like this made in time for Alex to resume  
>> his membership, or else that special dispensation be made in his case  
>> if the >change is approved.

I don't see any real need to do this, and I certainly don't see why it  
should be rushed through as if it were desperately urgent.

Alex is apparently welcome to come to TAG meetings, presumably for as long  
as he wants, and anyone is able to subscribe to this list. To do the  
things that belong in the TAG's scope, that seems to be enough.

I would be interested to hear of things that Marcos would have done but  
didn't because he was required to resign, and whether anything  would have  
mitigated the situation except changing the rules.

I certainly encourage the TAG to broaden participation in general, i.e.  
beyond just inviting people who have been elected in the past to continue  
acting as part of "the gang" - although I don't think that is a bad thing  
to do. In turn I am encouraged by the steps it has taken in that direction.

But I think there is a value in the W3C having members, and those members  
having something roughly approximating democratic participation. W3C as an  
organisation has a notable bias toward the US. Reducing formal constraints  
seems to me likely to actually deepen that bias. Given the current voting  
system that tends to winner-take-all, and the fact that this rule makes it  
more likely that in any election there are a maximum of 3 seats up for  
voting, this proposal could easily have the effect of making the TAG  
election a game for 2 or 3 players. I doubt that this is in the best  
interests of the Web. While TimBL can in principle appoint people to  
provide "balance", a sharply divided TAG is hardly likely to be a useful  



> BTW: the deletion of the word "member" is because employees of  
> non-member organizations can serve as invited experts (as I did after I  
> left IBM). I >believe the limits for both AB and TAG should apply to  
> employees of any organizations, not just W3C members. In principle this  
> change should IMO >be made whether or not the limits are relaxed; in  
> practice it doesn't seem urgent.
> [1]  
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AB-TAG-constraints

Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 00:31:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:03 UTC