The W3C Council: Director-free Formal Objections

“Director-free”

• A project of the AB & Process CG
• (taking a bit of a back-seat to the Legal Entity project recently)
• Work-in-progress draft at www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/director-free/

What is “Director-free” about?

• W3C Founding Director (Tim Berners Lee) less active than he used to, will eventually retire
• Currently has many formal responsibilities:
  • Discipline
  • Handling Member Submissions
  • Group creation & closure
  • Various formal announcements
  • …
  • Handling Formal Objections

Formal Objections

In the W3C process, an individual may register a Formal Objection to a decision. A Formal Objection to a group decision is one that the reviewer requests that the Director consider as part of evaluating the related decision […]

FO Handling: Basics

1. Group chair records a decision OR decision proposed in AC Review
2. Someone disagrees, files a Formal Objection
3. Director reviews, decides
4. If necessary, AC appeal

FO Handling: Historical

1. Group chair records a decision OR decision proposed in AC Review
2. Someone disagrees, files a Formal Objection
3. Team tries to resolve consensually
4. Director reviews, decides
5. If necessary, AC appeal

FO Handling: Typical

1. Group chair records a decision OR decision proposed in AC Review
2. Someone disagrees, files a Formal Objection
3. Team tries to resolve consensually
4. Delegated resolution:
   • Team guesses what the Director would decide if they can, or
   • Director reviews, decides
5. If necessary, AC appeal

FO Handling: Recent

1. Group chair records a decision OR decision proposed in AC Review
2. Someone disagrees, files a Formal Objection
3. Team tries to resolve consensually
4. Very delegated resolution:
   • Team guesses what the Director would decide if they can, or
   • Director reviews, decides
5. If necessary, AC appeal

What if there's no Director

• Legitimacy of decisions were anchored in historical role of founding Director
• Team still helpful to help find consensus
• Needs a new basis for decisions when consensus fails

The W3C Council: community-based FOhandling

The W3C Council: AB+TAG+CEO.

AB

The Advisory Board provides ongoing guidance to the Team on issues of strategy, management, legal matters, process, and conflict resolution.

TAG

The mission of the TAG is stewardship of the Web architecture. […] document and build consensus […] resolve issues involving general Web architecture […] coordinate cross-technology architecture […]

Hence the W3C Council

• Fits with the mission of its constituent groups
• Broad group with diverse expertise and perspectives
• Community-based legitimacy through elections
• Other alternatives considered found not satisfactory

FO Handling: W3C Council

1. Group chair records a decision OR decision proposed in AC Review
2. Someone disagrees, files a Formal Objection
3. Team tries to resolve consensually
4. W3C Council decides
5. If necessary, AC appeal

What is a Council “Decision”?

Sustain the objection

Cancel the existing decision or block the proposal under AC Review, return work to the community

Overrule the objection

Let the existing decision stand or clear the proposal under AC Review for advancement

Cannot make up alternatives

Sustains or overrules, but does not design: cannot change specifications, charters…

How it works

• Confirms membership and picks a chair (see separate presentation)
• Gets detailed briefing from the Team
• Hears parties and debates in confidence
• Makes decision (by consensus if possible, by vote if not)
• Documents and explain its decision
  • Transparency
  • Accountability
  • Building precedent

Current Status

• Roughly sketched, details to be tuned
• Not formally adopted (Director still in charge)
• Occasionally invoked (under delegation from Director)