SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 11 Oct 2018

<scribe> scribenick: dauwhe

tzviya: let's get started
... I may have to leave the call at some point

<Ann_Bassetti> trying to figure out my audio ... been awhile

tzviya: thanks everyone for joining us

<Ann_Bassetti> is there an actual num I can call?

tzviya: sorry this is last minute; I wanted to get a call in before TPAC

<tripu> agenda

<tzviya> * Welcome and Introductions

<tzviya> * Future meetings – schedule and format

<tzviya> * PWE GitHub repo [1]

<tzviya> * Moving forward with proposed revisions to CEPC

<tzviya> * Any other business

tzviya: let's do intros
... I'm Tzviya Siegman. I've been involved in w3c for 4-5 years, I came in via IDPF
... I chair PWG and I'm on the AB
... Angel and I have agreed to co-chair this CG
... taking over from Amy and Ann

Angel: This is Angel, with Alibaba
... I worked for w3c for 13 years, got involved in PWE before I left

amy: I was co-chair with Ann of the PWETF
... it's important work, I'm sorry I wasn't able to give it more attention
... thanks everyone to help this work continue

Ann_Bassetti: I'm Ann Bassetti
... I represented Boeing for W3C, now I'm retired
... I had too much going on to be chairing

dauwhe: work for Hachette, involved in EPUB and CSS

Judy_: I work for w3c and work for WAI
... involved for many years in helping w3c to have policy and reporting pathways around sexual harrassment
... glad there's been interest and work with the TF, and with the code of ethics
... I'm been tracking the development of the field in general, and I have some new resources
... like things about the efficacy of codes of conduct
... thanks to all who have helped get this off the ground

tripu: I work in w3c for systems team, for 4 years
... involved with PWETF, but not very active

<Angel> [Ralph arrives]

tripu: I want to help with everything technical, with systems, github, etc

Ralph: I know all of you :)
... I'm interested both personally and professionally in the scope of this CG
... I'm one of the ombudsfolk for the organization

Angel: everyone has been introduced
... let's talk about future meetings

tzviya: we have scheduled this call for once a month
... that was without checking with everyone

<amy> this time works for me

tzviya: does this time of day work? This day of the week?

<Ann_Bassetti> works for me

<Angel> meeting time https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=PWE+Call&iso=20181011T11&p1=43

<Ann_Bassetti> ditto day

tzviya: we figured we'd have a call once a month, and mostly work on github and email
... sounds like this might be the optimal time :)

<Ralph> [I suspect this is going to be a workable time for me]

<tripu> +1 to this day of week + time (if it's fixed relative to UTC)

tzviya: we're good with this time!

Ralph: when we change our clocks, tripu would prefer that we adjust the time of the meeting

<amy> the adjustment works for me too

tzviya: that would affect our next meeting
... tripu, do you want it fixed relative to UTC?

Ralph: fixed UTC

<tripu> +1

Amy: fixed UTC is also better as it avoids US-centric

tzviya: let's take this offline, and open a git hub issue

<Angel> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF

GitHub

Angel: let's talk about our lovely github repo
... we hope we can use this as a workplace, and do the editing of the code of conduct
... any comments, suggestions, how should we do this job?

amy: I'm new to Github
... will this group follow up with email? What's the process for sharing information?

Angel: that's a good question

<Ann_Bassetti> I'm sort of a Github newbie also ..

Judy_: I'd like to request to that use email for convening ourselves and agendas, but github for issues, resources, general work

<Ann_Bassetti> +1 to Judy's suggestion

<Ralph> +1 to email for administrivia and github issues for conversation threads

<tzviya> +1 to Judy_

<tripu> New GH issue: "Fix day of week and time of recurring PWETF meeting"

Judy_: but use email to help get together

+1 :)

Angel: any more comments? We have a proposal from Judy to use email for meeting planning etc and github for general work

<tripu> +1

RESOLUTION: use email to plan meetings

<Angel> Moving forward with proposed revisions to CEPC

Moving forward with proposed revisions to CEPC

tzviya: before we move on, can I just take a minute to show people the existing github repo?
... there are two documents
... there's an empty respec file, which will eventually hold the code of ethics
... and there's a references and resources markdown file

<tripu> The GH repository

<tripu> The beginning of the document

tzviya: people have been telling me about existing codes of conduct, FAQs, etc
... it's a good place to keep track of these resources
... so how do we go forward with revisions to the Code of conduct
... I've started to create issues that have come up in the last year

<amy> i'm happy to help w/ any background for what's happened in year

tzviya: do we want to do a total revision? revise section by section? there's an issue of legal review, and editorial review
... and we need volunteers to transfer existing code to respec

Angel: thanks for the updates

<tripu> Our labels on GH now

Angel: can Ann and Amy talk about previous achievements

amy: the issue of rewriting the COC because vlad was unhappy with some of the language
... instead of editing the existing CoC, he just rewrote it as he wanted to hear it
... I could see where it could be made stronger
... when I reread the pieces, and did a diff
... there weren't huge changes
... my worry was that we would lose important things
... but I didn't see too many things that were removed
... it took so long to get legal review of the existing one, so it worries me that it would be hard to do a rewrite

Ann_Bassetti: the essence of vlad's concerns, which he was passionate about
... it was that the way the original code was written, was to say you must not do this, and must not do that
... because of his personal cultural history, when you're told not to do things, that's an encouragement to do things
... but he did feel the language was too harsh
... and recast the document in a more gentle format

ann: can I clarify?
... I was not willing to soften the code of conduct based on the concerns of a single person
... we have should and must in w3c specs
... you can use MUST both to prohibit things and to promote things
... but we could make the language more nuanced

<Angel> I wonder if the words used in W3C was from IETF RFC2119 http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2119.html

Judy_: first, I appreciate the background info about the recent proposed changes
... revising the policy to make it sound more comfortable
... but I want to examine how effective it is
... we want a system that will ensure a PWE
... not just how to be nice in meetings, but to protect people
... second, the question of how w3c words a policy is tricky
... we are an international distributed organization
... we have policies, but there are not many procedures, no training...
... looking at this as a whole system, we might want to think more deeply
... finally, I've tracked evolving material in the field

<Ann_Bassetti> (esp no training or procedures for ombuds-people)

Judy_: there's a report on sexual harrassment that came out in March in the US
... focusing on harrassment of women
... the findings were a surprise to me
... saying that codes of conduct were not effective in changing behaviours

<Judy_> http://sites.nationalacademies.org/SHStudy/index.htm

Judy_: I can drop a link to the main page of the report
... maybe we can build a library of resources in github
... I suggest people take a look at that report

<tzviya> i will add it to https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/master/ReferencesAndResources.md

Judy_: PWE has a very broad scope, including a friendly atmosphere but also more complicated things
... we should think about this together

Ann: that sounds fascinating
... we need to address the most serioius issues, but those are not the most common
... we need to address the common and subtle behaviour

Judy_: the report I linked to is good on the subtle stuff, and they have data!

Angel: any more comments on this topic?

<amy> I think i might have read some stuff on code of conduct. iirc, the tl;dr was codes of conduct alone don't work but attitudes and policies "from the top" do make a difference

Judy_: I think I had some other resource to mention, but I'll send it later

Angel: I have some questions
... we have key elements to clarify
... two questions: editors and process
... for editors, me and tzviya
... for process, I'm not sure which process we should apply
... the current w3c process would be too heavy, and this is a special document
... who should review the drafts, before we present to the AC?

Judy_: I did remember the other comment
... talking to an actual ombudsperson
... there's an international association of ombudsfolks, who have best practices for their field

<Ann_Bassetti> wow, that's neat!

Judy_: we weren't aware of that before
... and it seems what we set up is very different from recommended practice
... re: angel's next steps
... we could plow ahead getting review for Vlad's revisions
... it would need fresh legal review
... I'm unclear whether the changes will improve the document
... I'm unclear how useful our current policy is

Angel: can you point us to that professional association of Ombud*

tripu: I don't remember our timelines
... I agree we should move faster, and the usual process is too heavy. We should be more agile
... I want to suggest a simple approach
... instead of randomly editing the file, we can protect the master branch
... and any change must have one or two positive reviews before being merged into master
... or someone could control the merging into master

<tzviya> +1 to tripu's suggestion

tripu: I could set up the repo to work in this manner

Angel: any objections?

<amy> +1 to tripu

RESOLUTION: set up repo as tripu proposed

Angel: Ivan wrote a github for dummies doc; we should share that in this group

<tripu> W3C tips and help on GitHub

<tzviya> see https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/issues/2

Ann_Bassetti: re: ombudspeople: we need to be sure we have such people available in all parts of the world that people are comfortable to go to

<Judy_> [jb: IOI link -- Note that this is for organizational ombudspersons. But might be interesting nevertheless to see if there are any relevant principles, e.g. in terms of independence, etc., http://www.theioi.org/publications/best-practice-papers

Ann_Bassetti: I know there are some women who are uncomfortable going to the official ombudspeople in their areas
... and we need to review process and training for these people

Angel: thanks for the suggestion
... I know w3c said that anyone could reach out to any ombudsperson, regardless of location

Ann_Bassetti: if people are unwilling to go to the existing people, the system falls apart quickly
... and there are issues of language and culture

Ralph: we dove deep into mechanics... thanks for the suggestion, tripu
... I want to uplevel several steps
... and react to judy's points
... As we consider changes to the code of ethics
... whatever changes we propose, should be thorougly based in discussions of what problem we're solving, what resources were being used...
... all documented in github
... the people who approve the text seems less important than the process used to reach agreement

<tripu> +1 to Ralph's comment (provide rationale, references)

<tzviya> ralph++

Ralph: unlike a standard specification, discussions might not start with PRs

<Judy_> +1 to Ralph's suggestion

<amy> +1

<Ann_Bassetti> me too :-)

Judy_: the reason I like what you're proposing, is that in the earlier talk of revisions it was about making the language feel more comfortable

<Ralph> Ralph: and the conversation should (ideally) be conducted in the thread of a GH issue

Judy_: but we want to have an effective system, so we need to balance these aspects

<Zakim> amy, you wanted to note a vague if persistent concern about re-opening codes of conduct etc and those in the pubic who oppose them. ideally that hearing public concern is good but

amy: general background...
... I've been involved in this area for a while
... there's been a lot of support for a CoC in w3c, which is good
... there's a loud group who are opposed to CoC's
... for example in Linux foundation
... if we're restarting this in a public way, be aware that there are some who are anti-code of conduct
... there are some outside agitators who may make some noise
... we need to be clear we're for a code of conduct

Ann_Bassetti: that reminded me that in the last year
... jeff sent us a question about someone who was going to join w3c groups, who was known to be an agitator
... how do we handle that? he hasn't done anything wrong in w3c but has caused mayhem elsewhere
... we need to think about this type of situation
... I also wanted to ask angel and tripu...
... in your parts of the world, are there codes of conduct? how are these topics handled in other cultures?

<amy> +1 to consider how one behaves in W3C to other members, about W3C, in discussions

Angel: one quick share... when I first saw googles code of conduct "be excellent to be each other"--that felt like harrassment. I want people to be proper to me.

Ann: that was part of Vlad's reaction

Angel: one question to everyone... we have six more minutes
... can people stay longer?
... let's give extra minutes to judy then continue

Judy_: there was a mention about procedures for ombudspersons
... there had a been a draft of procedures to follow for complaints
... there was an attempt to fast-track that document
... that draft has serious problems, I've heard
... please be aware
... there might be legal and ethical problems

tripu: Yes there are many subtleties based on culture
... things look different from my side of the atlantic, for example around jokes
... regarding people who want no codes of conduct

<Ann_Bassetti> interested to learn more about what Judy mentions re: issues with our earlier draft on ombuds procedures

tripu: there's a small difference between a 2-para COC and no code of conduct
... there are cases where there were no incidents, and I felt a CoC was not necessary beyond
... we should not close the door to those opinions

amy: I appreciate the point about cultural differences
... there are jokes, there is a way of behaving in Europe... I have been a brash american in this call :)
... In this very call we've run into three issues of cultural differences, across asia, europe, and america
... we're not a small open-source project, we're trying to be a neutral location for as many people as possible
... some things are necessary due to our size and diversity

<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to talk about action items

<tzviya> https://www.ashedryden.com/blog/codes-of-conduct-101-faq

tzviya: one of the docs I have in the reference is an FAQ on codes of conduct
... it asks questions like, why do we need a code of conduct?
... I've seen a number of orgs point to this.
... I'm also going to suggest a to-do list
... like increasing the # of ombuds
... ombuds training is crucial, should be an issue

Judy_: this is a good starting conversation
... one, Antonio, you were saying that there if there's not evidence of issues, that's a reason to not have a CoC
... within the scope of PWE, are things where people may not share details because of confidentiality. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
... second, regarding cultural discussions, we heard from men at one host that certain jokes were acceptable, but women in the same setting had a different perspective
... we need to be sensitive to cultural differences, but need to hear from a lot of perspectives

Ann_Bassetti: to amplify judy's point

<amy> just to add to my points above about code of conduct. for those who say "we all get along. we don't need a code of conduct, we say just be nice" then having a code of conduct wouldn't impact people being nice. it's a an add-on, not a taking away. having a code of conduct helps in bad behavior, it doesn't hinder good behavior

Ann_Bassetti: my most difficult experience was being in a WG with 3 american white men, they were just being mean to each other. It wasn't about different genders or culture.
... there are so many levels of codes of conduct
... there's sexual discrimination, racial discrimination, cultural issues, and beyond. It's a complicated topic.

Angel: I would like to have a timetable about this document
... we wanted a first draft before TPAC, but this seems... challenging
... when would be a proper timetable to have a first draft?
... it's been in more than first draft shape

amy: who has read the new draft?
... maybe we ask everyone to read it and come back with comments
... that would give us an idea of what people think

Angel: let's have internal draft first, and revise before it goes out

<amy> ralph++

tzviya: perhaps our goal can be to transfer the existing CoC to respec within the next ten seconds

Ralph: done :)

tzviya: we can take proposed revisions to github by the end of November?

Judy_: I do want to be clear about what our goal is
... Ralph's comment about process is importat

<Ralph> [ https://w3c.github.io/PWETF/ now has the text from the current CEPC pasted in, not respec-ified ]

Judy_: we should pull in Wendy S
... for legal review
... we should be clear about why we're doing changes, if we go ahead with them

tzviya: that's a good point, Judy
... instead of making changes, let's log proposed changes as issues, which I have started to do
... does that sound like a path forward?

<tripu> +1 to GH issues

Judy_: yes

<Ann_Bassetti> +1

tzviya: I'll need help from amy and ann
... we'll try to get those as issues by end of november

<angel_> +1 to Tzviya

tzviya: we're not revising for the sake of revision
... we do have issues around ombuds
... perhaps we want milestones in github
... and Antonio had asked if this should a living document
... that might not work for legal documents
... we don't need to decide today

Judy_: we're trying to make this a living doc?

<angel_> -1 to a living doc

tzviya: it was a question. We might not want to.

amy: how would this work?

<Judy_> [jb: my understanding is that this type of document would not work well as a living document]

tripu: I was thinking of what WHATWG does with HTML, a living, continuously-updated document

<tripu> Living document question

<Ann_Bassetti> haha

tzviya: speaking of TPAC
... PWE will be discussed at a few sessions
... angel and I will present at chair's breakfast.
... we will be at AC meeting Tuesday afternoon
... and we have proposed a breakout on Wednesday

Ann_Bassetti: I won't be at TPAC, but I think the liaison with the working group effectiveness issue is critical

tzviya: thanks everyone! We'll see you on email and github.

<tripu> Thanks!

<Ralph> Tzviya++

RRSAgent: draft minutes

- DRAFT -

SV_MEETING_TITLE

11 Oct 2018

Attendees

Contents

GitHub

Moving forward with proposed revisions to CEPC

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output