Chair should be required in charter about w3process

[cwilso]

Also related to the item in the Guide: w3c/Guide#185.

[frivoal]

That's an easy addition if we want to make it. Anyone has a reason not to? Not knowing who the chair will be until fairly late in the process can happen, but by the time we get to the AC Review, we're trying to launch the group, so we need to know anyway.

[samuelweiler]

Anyone has a reason not to?

Yes. Two different ones.

Publishing data in two places - in this case publishing the chairs both in charters and in the database - creates redundancy that leads to inconsistency. We would get better consistency by publishing the chairs in only one place.

Additionally, while I generally support the efforts to give the community more input into the chair selection process, there may be some advantages to not having personnel discussions in public fora. So long as chairs serve at the pleasure of Team, as they do now, perhaps we should continue to enjoy those advantages, and continue to allow a charter to be reviewed without naming chairs. Perhaps that only happens in exceptional cases, but I prefer the option exist.

[nigelmegitt]

continue to allow a charter to be reviewed without naming chairs

I don't think I've ever been involved in a TTWG rechartering that didn't name chairs. Is it normal for charter reviews to omit chairs?

[nigelmegitt]

Responding more directly to the issue: if the Team can change the Chairs independently of rechartering, and no AC review is needed to do so, then we should not even state Chairs in the Charter, let alone require them - in that case no Process change is needed but the charter template should be modified to remove the Chairs and possibly the Guide would need checking to ensure that it doesn't suggest they should be included.

That's a big "if" though! Given that current working practice is to include Chairs in Charters, I suspect that most AC reps consider that they do have the option to object to a Charter based on the selection of Chair, at least in principle.

[plehegar]

There has been an unwritten expectation that Chairs be named in proposed charters. The Team has sent however a few charters without proposed chairs in the past. I believe the latest example is the PAT WG charter in 2022, which generated several formal objections because of lack of chairs/team contact.

[cwilso]

Indeed.

Particularly for initial group charters, I think it helps engender confidence to know who the chair(s) are intended to be. Yes, the Team could theoretically change them at any time - but this is still a Team Decision that can be Formally Objected to (IIUC), so why not just get it out of the way all at once and make this a requirement?