Skip to content

Conversation

@martinthomson
Copy link
Member

@martinthomson martinthomson commented Oct 8, 2024

This is part 1 of a solution for #921.
This expands the restriction against concurrent AB/TAG participation to include the BoD.
It does so in a bit of an awkward way,
because the Process cannot tell the BoD how to operate. It is therefore double-ended:

  1. If you are appointed to any listed body, you need to resign from the AB or TAG.
  2. If you are appointed to the AB or TAG, you cannot accept unless you resign from the other body.

Preview | Diff

This is part 1 of a solution for w3c#921.
This expands the restriction against concurrent AB/TAG participation
to include the BoD.
It does so in a bit of an awkward way,
because the Process cannot tell the BoD how to operate.
It is therefore double-ended:

1. If you are appointed to any listed body,
   you need to resign from the AB or TAG.
2. If you are appointed to the AB or TAG,
   you cannot accept unless you resign from the other body.
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
@cwilso
Copy link
Contributor

cwilso commented Oct 9, 2024

I would like to go on the record that I oppose this condition.

@frivoal frivoal added this to the Deferred milestone May 19, 2025
@plehegar plehegar removed this from the Deferred milestone Aug 19, 2025
@css-meeting-bot
Copy link
Member

css-meeting-bot commented Aug 27, 2025

The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/928, and agreed to the following:

  • RESOLVED: Mark this as proposed to close
The full IRC log of that discussion <brent> Github: https://github.com//pull/928
<Ian> Brent: This proposal limits people from participating in different governance bodies at the same time.
<Ian> PLH: As a reminder, this situation has arisen a couple of times.
<Ian> Brent: This also fits into the broader question of how powers and responsibilities are balanced
<Ian> Ian: There's active opposition to this pull request.
<Ian> Brent: I also think "Propose to close" is appropriate and conversation should move back to the AB
<Ian> Ian: I am hearing that there is support for addressing the concerns that were raised, but in a holistic fashion and that may lead to other pull requests.
<Ian> Brent: Right, the conversation needs to continue and this PR is not the place for it to continue
<Ian> RESOLVED: Mark this as proposed to close

@brentzundel
Copy link
Member

Closing this PR in accordance with the conversation during the last Process CG meeting with the intention that conversation on this topic continue in Issue #921

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants