- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 15:25:16 -0400
- To: <www-talk@w3.org>
- Cc: janet@w3.org, timbl@w3.org
[I'm not sure this is the correct place to send this message, but I don't see any other public forums for discussing general issues like this one. If I'm in the wrong place, please let me know the proper place to go with this. Thanks!] The W3C issued a press release on 17 April 2001, "World Wide Web Consortium Grows to Over 500 Members": http://www.w3.org/2001/04/500-member-pressrelease In the the second paragraph of the section "W3C Produces Standard-Setting, Interoperable Technologies Through Consensus", the following sentence appears: >To ensure >accountability to all users of the Web, the W3C Process provides a clear >description of how work is started, performed, reviewed, and completed. This sentence has been ringing in my ears since I first read it. The central problem is that publication of process does not "ensure accountability to all users of the Web". While it does inform users of the processes by which the consortium claims to govern itself, publication alone has nothing to do with accountability. Accountability requires meeting standards, not just publishing them. In a stricter sense, accountability means auditability by trusted folks typically called accountants or auditors. Because the general public has trust in those auditors - and because the auditors themselves are subject to audit - these mechanisms ensure that organizations abide by the processes they set forth. This is pretty integral to a number of ISO process specs, though not entirely well-loved. It doesn't appear to a part of the W3C process, however. Apart from the fact that "audit" doesn't appear anywhere in the process document (at http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010208/process.html), the only oversight mentioned is that of the Chairman and the host institutions in non-W3C process situations. The word conform appears only in particular contexts which again do not apply to process. This may simply be the way the W3C chooses to operate. If that is the case, however, I would strongly suggest that they remove references to "accountability to all users of the Web", as there is no enforcement mechanism for such accountability. As the W3C chooses to operate most of its activities and working groups confidentially, there is no alternative means for the public to ascertain whether or not W3C process is actually applied in practice, or to evaluate the rules by which working groups conduct their business. And yes, I'll be exploring how other consortia and standards bodies deal with these issues as a followup. Simon St.Laurent - Associate Editor, O'Reilly & Associates XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. XHTML: Migrating Toward XML http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2001 15:24:57 UTC