Comments (8)
So, in general we need to sort out which parts of the process actually ought to apply to CGs and BGs. For example, conforming to the code of ethics and professional conduct probably does, and the Director's ability to dismiss for cause. Section 3 says "These policies apply to participants in the following groups: Advisory Committee, Advisory Board, TAG, Working Groups, and Interest Groups."
I think we need to say in the introduction at the end of section 1 "The W3C also operates Community and Business Groups, which are separately described in their own process document." and link to https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/. Those pages probably need an update to include "Dismissal from a community or business group" and allow the Director to dismiss for cause. Do we need conflict of interest policy links in the CG/BG process?
from w3process.
Mike to discuss
from w3process.
Yes, it's time to look at integrating all our xGs into the process, but not 2018
from w3process.
This shouldn't have been closed, must have done it by accident somehow.
from w3process.
Moving the entire documentation of CGs and BGs into the process seems like a lot of work. There are some edge questions here (e.g. does the Director's authority to dismiss someone apply to CGs and BGs if they are not mentioned). perhaps a pointer admitting of their existence?
from w3process.
I think the answer to the question posed is 'no', because CGs and BGs are open to non-members, and the process document is for running Member business.
Having said that, I think that (a) CGs and BGs should be mentioned in the Process document, by adding to the end of Section (1) Introduction "The W3C also operates Business and Community Groups, which are open to non-members and do not produce normative Recommendations. They are described by the Business and Community Group [process https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/].
I also think that the CG/BG process should contain identical provisions in a few cases, and should be edited. That includes mirroring the provisions of 3.1, especially the material added in Process2018:
"Participants in any W3C activity must abide by the terms and spirit of the W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct and the participation requirements described in section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.
The Director may suspend or remove for cause a participant in any group (including the AB and TAG), where cause includes failure to meet the requirements of this process, the membership agreement, or applicable laws."
Possibly 3.3 Consensus should be mentioned somehow, but the text in the process is quite specific to members.
Possibly 3.5 Appeal of a Chair's decision (yes, it should be possible to appeal to the Director for a BG/CG decision).
That's all I see, and it's mostly updating the CG/BG process rather than the process document.
from w3process.
I agree that CGs and BGs should have their own process document, and that such process should be synched up with the WG process in certain areas. I also agree that this is now a Process 2019 candidate, but where should it go?
from w3process.
see also #180
from w3process.
Related Issues (20)
- What kind of Group is for what kind of work? HOT 1
- TAG Appointment Process Shortcomings HOT 25
- AB Role in TAG Appointment HOT 13
- Are TAG Appointments mandatory for the Team to fill?
- Ground the different types of groups / maturity stages in Problem Statements HOT 4
- Strip section 6.2.2.1 “wide review” of the mailing list currently mentioned HOT 1
- Affiliation constraints on TAG membership HOT 17
- Chair should be required in charter HOT 38
- Run link checker on Process Drafts HOT 3
- Determining AC Consensus of Post-Review Changes HOT 8
- Description of the role of the AB HOT 9
- TAG appointment ambiguity about ratification by both AB and TAG HOT 14
- Ambiguity about (super) majority thresholds: of those voting, or of those eligible to vote? HOT 8
- Dealing with procedural disagreements within the Council
- Multiple possible outcomes of a successful AC Appeal HOT 2
- Align with Bylaws changes
- Making the Council's short circuit a little more flexible HOT 9
- Member Associations to Liaison Relationships HOT 2
- Creating a more visible banner for old process documents HOT 2
- Retire the "Streamlined Publication Approval" system HOT 3
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from w3process.