Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Council: Who are the "deciders"? #173

Open
plehegar opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Council: Who are the "deciders"? #173

plehegar opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 5 comments
Assignees
@ylafon
Labels
bug The specification is broken or misleading and need to change.

Comments

@plehegar
Copy link
Member

plehegar commented Apr 4, 2023

[[
This report is then sent to the W3C Council, to the deciders, and to the objectors. The Council, like the Team before it, may try to find a consensus path forward. Otherwise, the W3C Council uses input from the report, the deciders, and objectors to either overrule the objection (in which case the original decision is in force), or to sustain the objection (in which case the original decision is vacated).
]]
https://www.w3.org/Guide/council/council.html

It is not clear who the Deciders are (separate from the council). Is it different for different types of FOs. Perhaps Team for charters and the WG for WG decisions? Or just team/chairs for WG decisions?

(from @astearns)

cc @frivoal
@plehegar plehegar added the bug The specification is broken or misleading and need to change. label Apr 4, 2023
@plehegar
Copy link
Member Author

plehegar commented Apr 4, 2023

it seems awkward to me to use the term "decider" when the Council itself is meant to make the decision.

@frivoal
Copy link
Contributor

frivoal commented Apr 5, 2023

The intended meaning is that, given that a Formal Objection is against a decision, "the deciders" are whoever made or proposed the decision that is being objected to. If that meaning isn't obvious, rephrasing is certainly welcome.

Perhaps Team for charters and the WG for WG decisions? Or just team/chairs for WG decisions?

Yes. WG for group decisions, chair for chair decisions, Team for Team decisions (including proposed charters)…

@ylafon
Copy link
Member

ylafon commented Apr 5, 2023

One option would be to use "requesters", or just define "deciders" as Florian did above in plain text

@plehegar
Copy link
Member Author

plehegar commented Apr 5, 2023

One option would be to use "requesters", or just define "deciders" as Florian did above in plain text

Adding the definition seems good enough to me.

@astearns
Copy link
Member

astearns commented Apr 5, 2023

The definition could go in the paragraph above. This part

it is always better if there can be a consensus between the group that made the original decision and the objector

could change to something like:

it is always better if there can be a consensus between the group that made the original decision and the objectors (we will use ‘deciders’ and ‘objectors’ to refer to these groups from this point)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@ylafon ylafon

Labels
bug The specification is broken or misleading and need to change.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@frivoal @ylafon @astearns @plehegar