- From: Peter Crowther <Peter.Crowther@networkinference.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:45:43 -0000
- To: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
> From: Peter Crowther > Hmm. Repeated and sustained argument for one point of view > from the Chair on an issue that will come to a vote. > Whatever happened to Chair's impartiality per W3C Process? My apologies - the Chair is not necessarily required to be absolutely impartial. Now that I've had a chance to look through [1], the Chair[...]: MAINTAINS GROUP PROCESS AND ORGANIZATION: [...] Generally stays neutral in discussion but can participate in technical discussions if announces in advance that will remove his or her chair "hat" at that time. [...] WHAT TO LOOK FOR WHEN CHOOSING A CHAIR: [...] The ability (both actual and perceived by the Working Group -- including potential competitors) to forge consensus fairly and without bias from your affiliation/employer and, sometimes, even your own technical positions; [...] I feel that Professor Hendler has, in general, met the first point; I feel that he has not 'forge[d] consensus fairly and without bias from [...] [his] own technical position' in this case. - Peter [1] http://www.w3.org/Guide/chair-roles
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2002 09:46:14 UTC