Reorg charter documentation #204

ianbjacobs · 2023-10-25T15:26:53Z

I've tried to simplify the explanations by:

Separating high-level process from implementation details
Separating "new" from "existing"

I've endeavored not to lose any requirements and also to take into account other edits that have happened this week re: Director-free.

#117 (comment)

* Clarity around role of FSA compared to WG participation * Change "consensus" to "support" * Added a link to validate-repos

Co-authored-by: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>

* Removed an extra sentence (not needed, IMO, given sentence that follows)

minor editorial

1) Separate high-level process from implementation details 2) Separate "new charters" from "existing charters" 3) Use short labels for process steps to make clearer what has to happen 4) Further clarify roles of Strategy Team and TiLT

ianbjacobs · 2023-10-25T15:28:08Z

Note: I did not spend much time on the "Implementation" section of the document other than to try to fold in @xueyuanjia edits.

xueyuanjia · 2023-10-26T09:11:55Z

process/charter.html

+<dl>
+  <dt>Evaluate readiness</dt>
+  <dd>Let the proponents know if the charter is not well-formed (per the template), if it is perceived to be harmful to the Web, or if it is not a priority at the current time.</dd>
+  <dt>Send advance notice to AC</dt>


I'd suggest to change "Send advance notice to AC" to "Work with W3C Communications Team to send advance notice to AC". We normally don't expect team contacts to directly send advance notices, and sending emails to (different from <ac-forum>) seems restricted to a sub-group of the Team.

Suggested change

<dt>Send advance notice to AC</dt>

<dt>Work with W3C Communications Team to send <a href="adv-notice.html">advance notice to AC</a></dt>

Hi @xueyuanjia,
I agree with the point that the team contact does not do the advance notice. But I would like to avoid mentioning details in the short label, and I would like to keep the short label very short. I propose instead: "Request advance notice to AC."

process/charter.html

plehegar · 2023-10-26T13:03:15Z

process/charter.html

-<p>If TiLT resolves to extend a charter, the Strategy or Project Lead (or delegate) sends e-mail to the
-W3C Communications Team in the form of an extension announcement; see the
-<a href="https://www.w3.org/new-doc-from-template?location=%2FTeam%2Ftemplates&amp;template=%2Fafs%2Fw3.org%2Fpub%2FWWW%2FTeam%2FTemplates%2Fcharter-extension.html&amp;submit=Continue...">charter extension template</a>.</p>
+<p><a href="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2014JulSep/0018.html">Since July 2014</a>, the Team seeks a baseline level of support from Members before approving a charter.</p>


At this point, I think this notice can be removed. No need to link to the reason why a paragraph is there.

plehegar · 2023-10-26T13:05:48Z

process/charter.html

+<dl>
+  <dt>Evaluate readiness</dt>
+  <dd>Let the proponents know if the charter is not well-formed (per the template), if it is perceived to be harmful to the Web, or if it is not a priority at the current time.</dd>
+  <dt>Send advance notice to AC</dt>


Suggested change

<dt>Send advance notice to AC</dt>

<dt>Work with W3C Communications Team to send <a href="adv-notice.html">advance notice to AC</a></dt>

plehegar · 2023-10-26T13:07:05Z

process/charter.html

-<p class="timeline"><em>Timeline:</em> this takes 5 weeks minimum. Formal objections to a charter will
-  add more time.</p>
+    <ul>
+      <li>Request the advance notice (via the <a href="#pipeline">pipeline</a>) as soon as you have something to point to.</li>


Suggested change

<li>Request the advance notice (via the <a href="#pipeline">pipeline</a>) as soon as you have something to point to.</li>

<li>Work with W3C Communications Team to send <a href="adv-notice.html">advance notice to AC</a> (via the <a href="#pipeline">pipeline</a>) as soon as you have something to point to.</li>

plehegar · 2023-10-26T13:19:39Z

process/charter.html

@@ -294,7 +289,7 @@ <h3>5.1 Organizing the Call for Review</h3>
    <ol>
      <li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>


We don't want to send github.io links for AC review.

Suggested change

<li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>

<li>A URI to the proposed charter (don't use github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>

plehegar · 2023-10-26T13:35:31Z

Some minor tweaks but looks great otherwise

ianbjacobs · 2023-10-26T13:57:19Z

@plh, I made changes based on your comments (mostly incorporating the suggestions).

csarven · 2023-10-26T14:42:25Z

process/charter.html

@@ -292,9 +285,9 @@ <h3>5.1 Organizing the Call for Review</h3>
    be sent <strong>at least three business days before</strong> the anticipated start
    date of the review. The request must include:
    <ol>
-      <li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>
+      <li>A URI to the proposed charter; please don't use github.io links. This charter is public during the AC review.</li>


I think the underlying concern is less about github.io but that the content may change while it is still under review (including horizontal review).

Thus, focus should instead be on immutable snapshots of a proposed charter. This should either be on:

W3C controlled space (e.g., a W3C Team controlled GitHub repository); or

W3C URI space (w3.org); or

a well-known trusted third-party service (e.g., archive.org).

This not only ensures that review are based on fixed content but also would prohibit changes to the proposed charter by anyone that is either unauthorised or did not have the consent of the group that's proposing the charter, e.g., see solid/solid-wg-charter#47 (comment) where it talks about this exact issue:

The proposed WG charter is still under horizontal review and making changes along the lines proposed in this PR without CG's consent is unacceptable behaviour.

Team practice is to always put a copy of the proposed charter in W3C url space for ac review.

Personally I use a naming convention so the Foo WG charter will be like foo-2023-ac.html which also makes it easier to get review of post-ac changes by sending a diff between that and foo-2023.html.

But yes the point is to avoid changing the document which is under AC review.

@csarven see my proposed change, does that address your concern?

svgeesus · 2023-10-26T14:57:54Z

process/charter.html

@@ -292,9 +285,9 @@ <h3>5.1 Organizing the Call for Review</h3>
    be sent <strong>at least three business days before</strong> the anticipated start
    date of the review. The request must include:
    <ol>
-      <li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>
+      <li>A URI to the proposed charter; please don't use github.io links. This charter is public during the AC review.</li>


Suggested change

<li>A URI to the proposed charter; please don't use github.io links. This charter is public during the AC review.</li>

<li>A URI to the proposed charter; use a w3.org link, not a github.io links. This charter is public, and must not be altered, during the AC review.</li>

s/links/link

Now says: "A w3.org URI to the proposed charter (not a github.io URI). This charter is public, and must not be altered, during the AC review."

Note: Outside of this sentence, the term "URI" is used 10 times and "URL" is used 0 times. Therefore I went with URI.

Thanks @svgeesus and @csarven for this discussion.

Don't alter charter during review

dontcallmedom and others added 13 commits February 15, 2021 17:41

Document considerations when migrating work from a CG to a WG

66ada70

Add reference to Rec track readiness best practices

2a47e65

Add signature

ab87ea2

Modifications closer to Ian's outline

3dd44e0

Incorporated more suggestions by Dom

6c48557

#117 (comment)

incorporate more changes from dom:

fcc7034

* Clarity around role of FSA compared to WG participation * Change "consensus" to "support" * Added a link to validate-repos

Fix duplicate text

890a496

Co-authored-by: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>

* Typo fix and minor editorial

5e3ad44

* Removed an extra sentence (not needed, IMO, given sentence that follows)

added a link

6cd36d2

minor editorial

Merge branch 'main' of github.com:w3c/Guide

1450c17

Merge branch 'main' of github.com:w3c/Guide

cfe8a52

Merge branch 'main' of github.com:w3c/Guide

bb6fbce

Reorganize charter documentation:

47c9a89

1) Separate high-level process from implementation details 2) Separate "new charters" from "existing charters" 3) Use short labels for process steps to make clearer what has to happen 4) Further clarify roles of Strategy Team and TiLT

ianbjacobs requested review from plehegar and xueyuanjia October 25, 2023 15:27

plehegar requested a review from svgeesus October 25, 2023 16:14

plehegar assigned ianbjacobs Oct 25, 2023

plehegar mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2023

Remove "Director's decision" from the top of charter.html. #206

Merged

xueyuanjia reviewed Oct 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

plehegar reviewed Oct 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

process/charter.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

plehegar and others added 2 commits October 26, 2023 08:47

Added back the missing </div>

a7351c6

Updated short labels where charter shepherd working with others

8930c87

plehegar approved these changes Oct 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

plehegar and others added 2 commits October 26, 2023 09:37

Merge branch 'main' into charter-20231025

26de9b0

Small changes based on PLH review

6e84092

csarven reviewed Oct 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

svgeesus approved these changes Oct 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

Use w3.org URI

b4d4338

Don't alter charter during review

plehegar merged commit 3fcf6f2 into main Oct 26, 2023

plehegar deleted the charter-20231025 branch October 26, 2023 16:09

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Reorg charter documentation #204

Reorg charter documentation #204

ianbjacobs commented Oct 25, 2023

ianbjacobs commented Oct 25, 2023

xueyuanjia Oct 26, 2023 •

edited by plehegar

Loading

plehegar Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs Oct 26, 2023

plehegar Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs Oct 26, 2023

plehegar Oct 26, 2023

plehegar Oct 26, 2023

plehegar Oct 26, 2023

plehegar commented Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs commented Oct 26, 2023

csarven Oct 26, 2023

svgeesus Oct 26, 2023

svgeesus Oct 26, 2023

svgeesus Oct 26, 2023

csarven Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs Oct 26, 2023

	<dt>Send advance notice to AC</dt>
	<dt>Work with W3C Communications Team to send <a href="adv-notice.html">advance notice to AC</a></dt>

	<li>Request the advance notice (via the <a href="#pipeline">pipeline</a>) as soon as you have something to point to.</li>
	<li>Work with W3C Communications Team to send <a href="adv-notice.html">advance notice to AC</a> (via the <a href="#pipeline">pipeline</a>) as soon as you have something to point to.</li>

		@@ -294,7 +289,7 @@ <h3>5.1 Organizing the Call for Review</h3>
		<ol>
		<li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>

	<li>A URI to the proposed charter (Note: avoid using github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>
	<li>A URI to the proposed charter (don't use github.io links); this charter is public during the AC review.</li>

	<li>A URI to the proposed charter; please don't use github.io links. This charter is public during the AC review.</li>
	<li>A URI to the proposed charter; use a w3.org link, not a github.io links. This charter is public, and must not be altered, during the AC review.</li>

Reorg charter documentation #204

Reorg charter documentation #204

Conversation

ianbjacobs commented Oct 25, 2023

ianbjacobs commented Oct 25, 2023

xueyuanjia Oct 26, 2023 • edited by plehegar Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

plehegar commented Oct 26, 2023

ianbjacobs commented Oct 26, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xueyuanjia Oct 26, 2023 •

edited by plehegar

Loading