This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 16677 - Consider requiring seconds for Change Proposals
Summary: Consider requiring seconds for Change Proposals
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: working group Decision Policy (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: This bug has no owner yet - up for the taking
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-04-10 04:22 UTC by Maciej Stachowiak
Modified: 2012-04-10 20:36 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Maciej Stachowiak 2012-04-10 04:22:33 UTC
Consider requiring one or more independent seconds for Change Proposals. Our Process allows a single person who feels strongly to override a large majority who are weakly opposed; only the person who feels strongly will feel motivated to write a Change Proposal and thus will win by default.

The W3C Process defines consensus as: "Consensus: A substantial number of individuals in the set support the decision and nobody in the set registers a Formal Objection. Individuals in the set may abstain. Abstention is either an explicit expression of no opinion or silence by an individual in the set. Unanimity is the particular case of consensus where all individuals in the set support the decision (i.e., no individual in the set abstains)."

We are effectively not enforcing the first part, "a substantial number of individuals in the set support the decision". If only one or two people support a change, that is not "a substantial number" relative to the size of the full WG.
Comment 1 Maciej Stachowiak 2012-04-10 04:22:56 UTC
Note: there is not consensus among the Chairs that this would be a good change.
Comment 2 Edward O'Connor 2012-04-10 20:07:19 UTC
FWIW, I think this is a great idea.
Comment 3 Sam Ruby 2012-04-10 20:23:27 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note: there is not consensus among the Chairs that this would be a good change.

If there is a feature freeze in effect, that changes the picture considerably, and I could support this change under those circumstances.
Comment 4 Sam Ruby 2012-04-10 20:36:31 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> 
> If there is a feature freeze in effect, that changes the picture considerably,
> and I could support this change under those circumstances.

I take that back, a feature freeze isn't sufficient.  I would support this if it applies to everybody.  For example if https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16675 were to be implemented, I could support this change.