From W3C Wiki
Revision as of 14:30, 14 October 2013 by Tantekelik (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is a stub. You can help the W3C wiki by expanding it.

The AB refers to the W3C Advisory Board.


W3C Process

W3C process improvements are discussed in the community group:

See process for more details.

Use of Github at W3C

Cultural conventions for attribution

The new HTMLWG charter allows for working group members to contribute HTML5 Extension specifications using CC-by, and then places attribution requirements on any derivative works.

These attribution requirements are a good start for growing cultural conventions for attribution both inside W3C, and beyond W3C, towards a goal of making attribution founded in cultural norms rather than legal (copyright) requirements, potentially allowing for use of CC0 for contributions to W3C in the future.

Twitter Account

The Advisory Board has a Twitter account: @W3CAB

Nearly the entire AB has access and can post anything regarding AB-related matters. The methodology is to empower individual responsibility and trust by default, especially in such a small group. This method has worked well with the CSSWG (any CSSWG member may "have the keys" to @CSSWG) and it's been hugely successful in engaging the broader developer community.

If you are a member of the AB, contact Tantek Çelik on a secure communications channel and he'll gladly share access to @W3CAB.

  • 2013-09-18 access broadly shared with AB members in person W3C AB meeting at MIT.
  • 2013-06-04 @W3CAB Twitter created.


Suggestions for the AB.

Minor Process Tweaks

The Process document hasn't really been maintained in many years. There's talk of overhauling the Process, but meanwhile, how about making some simple changes that address particularly frustrating points in the Process?

  • Allowing REC to refer to CR (treating PR as a transitional phase, like LC). fantasai 04:52, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Agreed. I'll see what I can do to help this along. - Tantek Çelik 14:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Inter-W3C-spec normative referencing policy is apparently not an explicit part of the Process Document. See CG W3Process issue 33 for more info/updates on this. - Tantek Çelik 14:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Creating a "Proposed Edited Candidate Recommendation" stage (or pick a better name) to allow CRs to be updated without going back to Working Draft. This would be identical to LC--just a renaming of an existing process--so qualifies as a Dead Simple Change. fantasai 04:52, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
    • What about simply combining LC and CR, and allowing a document in that phase to be updated and stay at that phase? - Tantek Çelik 14:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Making sure the ABs get members opinion

  • AB are elected by W3C members and need to make sure that they are collecting their ideas, suggestion... That wiki is great, the recent minutes members-only minutes issued by Coralie were great, but regular open debriefing communication to members/interested parties is key. It could be interesting to have an every-6-months call scheduled in advance to 'meet the AB'. This would be the opportunity to ask direct question to the AB, based on a collaborative agenda.

Virginie Galindo (gemalto AC rep) ~~~~

Add Your Suggestion Here ...

  • ...

and sign it with ~~~~ (four tildas)


Taxi sharing for meetings is organized on the wiki: MeetingTaxis


Background about this page.

I (Tantek Çelik) ran for the AB on a platform of greater openness in how we do things. As part of that, feel free to add your suggestions for improving the AB and W3C Process as a whole here and I'll see what I can about them. I'm going to encourage other AB members to similarly consider using input from the wiki as another source. Thanks, - Tantek Çelik 04:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)


See Also