13:59:35 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #w3process
13:59:35 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/08/26-w3process-irc
13:59:36 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:59:37 <Zakim> Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group
13:59:37 <dsinger_> zakim, start meeting
13:59:37 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:59:39 <Zakim> Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group
13:59:44 <weiler> present+
14:00:00 <dsinger_> present+
14:00:11 <dsinger_> present+ florian
14:00:26 <jeff> present+
14:00:57 <wseltzer> present+
14:01:32 <koalie> koalie has joined #w3process
14:02:12 <wseltzer> scribenick: wseltzer
14:02:18 <wseltzer> dsinger_: state of P2020
14:02:27 <wseltzer> ... anything we need to know, do?
14:02:33 <cwilso> present+
14:02:38 <wseltzer> jeff: we're moving forward
14:02:43 <plh> plh has joined #w3process
14:02:52 <wseltzer> florian: we have a published ref to reference
14:02:56 <jrosewell> jrosewell has joined #w3process
14:03:05 <jrosewell> present+
14:03:14 <plh> present+
14:03:49 <koalie> present+ Coralie
14:04:10 <wseltzer> plh: are you continuig to make edits?
14:04:20 <wseltzer> ... since I took a snapshot
14:04:20 <plh> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/commit/1a983931903e79981a4bffc0f7738f80cbdc1d35#diff-ec9cfa5f3f35ec1f84feb2e59686c34d
14:05:13 <wseltzer> dsinger_: agenda-bash?
14:05:24 <wseltzer> [crickets]
14:05:43 <wseltzer> Topic: 4) Issues and PRs tagged agenda+.
14:05:53 <wseltzer> dsinger_: 4.1) Discipline; we were working on the text at the last meeting
14:06:00 <koalie> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/432
14:07:12 <wseltzer> florian: there was sugestion that insertion could be confusing in context
14:07:22 <wseltzer> ... that was from fantasai, and we haven't heard from her
14:07:41 <wseltzer> ... a new, publicly available document regarding discipline
14:07:48 <wseltzer> ... from Coralie
14:08:02 <koalie> https://www.w3.org/Guide/process/banning.html
14:08:13 <wseltzer> koalie: W3M has developed guidance on procedures for removing individuals from groups in rare instances
14:08:21 <wseltzer> ... ^ guidebook resource
14:08:48 <wseltzer> ... we'll announce it to members and chairs
14:08:54 <dsinger_> q?
14:09:23 <wseltzer> florian: sounds ok to me
14:09:35 <dsinger_> q+
14:09:46 <wseltzer> ... if Process delegates to Director, and this is how director will act
14:09:54 <wseltzer> plh: goal to document
14:10:24 <wseltzer> dsinger_: should we link to these guidelines, and Process text
14:10:30 <dsinger_> ack ds
14:10:31 <wseltzer> ... re guidelines...
14:10:33 <wseltzer> florian: I support
14:10:38 <wseltzer> dsinger_: mostly supportive
14:11:24 <wseltzer> ... but is it CEPC-specific
14:11:40 <wseltzer> plh: it doesn't say CEPC
14:11:50 <wseltzer> florian: might be a question for AB review
14:11:55 <plh> s/say/restrict to/
14:12:00 <wseltzer> dsinger_: consensus here that this doc is good enough to link to?
14:12:04 <wseltzer> ... any objections?
14:12:19 <wseltzer> ... hearing silence, link it.
14:12:21 <wseltzer> ... thanks koalie
14:12:30 <wseltzer> plh: I'll link from /guide as well
14:12:44 <weiler> koalie++
14:13:04 <wseltzer> dsinger_: is the glitch solved?
14:13:19 <wseltzer> florian: works for me, but I wasn't the one who raised the issue
14:13:50 <dsinger_> q?
14:13:52 <wseltzer> dsinger_: fine to leave for next week
14:13:58 <wseltzer> s/week/meeting/
14:14:05 <wseltzer> dsinger_: will we address 312 at the same time?
14:14:11 <koalie> q+
14:14:42 <wseltzer> jeff: 312 introduces additional topics for Director-free
14:14:49 <wseltzer> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/312
14:14:50 <koalie> q-
14:14:54 <fantasai> fantasai has joined #w3process
14:14:58 <wseltzer> ... so leave it for the AB project
14:15:09 <koalie> q+
14:15:18 <wseltzer> florian: note in 312 that it's partially addressed by this PR
14:15:30 <koalie> q-
14:16:03 <fantasai> present+
14:17:24 <wseltzer> dsinger_: propose we continue offline
14:17:52 <wseltzer> dsinger_: 428
14:17:56 <koalie> [coralie departs]
14:17:58 <wseltzer> ... plh, you wanted to keep it open
14:18:12 <wseltzer> florian: I updated
14:18:20 <koalie> koalie has left #w3process
14:18:23 <wseltzer> ... note re no way to update Rec normatively
14:18:50 <wseltzer> ... ambiguity wrt whether team can/can't make proposed corrections
14:18:58 <wseltzer> ... as it's class 2, clarify they can
14:19:27 <wseltzer> plh: need to review
14:19:40 <wseltzer> dsinger_: First meetings, 434
14:19:58 <wseltzer> florian: we had a discussion and resolution in the AB
14:20:14 <wseltzer> ... we have a requirement for 8 weeks between announcement and meeting
14:20:19 <wseltzer> ... for physical meeting
14:20:56 <jeff> q+
14:21:23 <wseltzer> ... but under current process, you could have a proposed charter, and meet sooner than 8weeks after approval
14:21:57 <dsinger_> q?
14:22:42 <jeff> q-
14:22:47 <plh> q+
14:23:18 <weiler> q+
14:23:26 <dsinger_> ack plh
14:23:52 <wseltzer> wseltzer: this seemed to me overly constraining, especially when groups are just resolving minor wording issues in charters
14:24:07 <wseltzer> ... and they plan toward a pre-existing meeting, such as TPAC
14:24:14 <wseltzer> ... I haven't seen AB resolution
14:24:30 <wseltzer> plh: so are you saying groups under discussion now can't plan for TPAC
14:24:40 <wseltzer> florian: this year, not a problem with virtual
14:24:45 <jeff> q+
14:25:01 <wseltzer> ... but saying you can't make plans before the group exists
14:25:23 <dsinger_> q?
14:25:29 <dsinger_> ack weil
14:25:40 <dsinger_> q+ to talk about getting approvals to join
14:25:49 <wseltzer> weiler: when I think about how specs are being incubated, can imagine a CG sayig
14:26:01 <wseltzer> ... "we want to have a meeting" whether as a CG or WG
14:26:24 <wseltzer> ... does this mean they can't meet if thinking about chartering?
14:26:31 <wseltzer> florian: you can't meet as formal WG meeting
14:26:54 <wseltzer> dsinger_: you can have a CG meeting, not one making WG decisions
14:27:31 <plh> q+ to mention that decisions are async nowadays
14:27:48 <dsinger_> q?
14:27:50 <wseltzer> dsinger_: e.g. decision to take up a new WD
14:27:51 <dsinger_> ack jef
14:28:04 <jrosewell> aren't these examples of issues for the chair(s) of the group to be empowered to decide upon? If the chair makes a decision that the members of the group disagree with can't they address that via another route?
14:28:12 <wseltzer> jeff: sounds as though this conversation supports informal meeting at TPAC
14:28:26 <weiler> weiler: what is a WD decision?  What sort of decisions could/should an incubator group not make?
14:28:33 <wseltzer> ... but the text says "informal meetings should not be planned to get around this restriction"
14:28:52 <wseltzer> ... maybe remove that text from PR?
14:29:21 <dsinger_> q?
14:29:23 <wseltzer> florian: the AB had said no exception for TPAC, because some peoople don't travel to all TPACs
14:29:44 <wseltzer> jeff: I thought I was hearing agreement here that groups could meet informally
14:29:57 <wseltzer> florian: no, I'm not agreeing that
14:30:24 <weiler> q+
14:30:50 <wseltzer> ... disagree with setting social pressures that start the group informally and then make others come in later to object
14:31:13 <dsinger_> q?>
14:31:17 <dsinger_> ack ds
14:31:17 <Zakim> dsinger_, you wanted to talk about getting approvals to join
14:31:19 <wseltzer> plh: but it's too easy to evade that restriction, just pick another name
14:31:54 <dsinger_> ack plh
14:31:54 <Zakim> plh, you wanted to mention that decisions are async nowadays
14:32:00 <wseltzer> dsinger_: speaking from personal experience, I can't get formal approval to join a group before its charter is finalized; can't start internal approval process
14:32:04 <wseltzer> ... and that takes time
14:32:25 <wseltzer> plh: that's why we earlier set the time from the time the charter was sent for review
14:33:09 <wseltzer> ... also, all of our decisions are now taken asynchronously, confirmed offline
14:33:29 <weiler> q?
14:33:35 <wseltzer> florian: but social pressures not to go against consensus, or not object and make us change travel plans
14:33:36 <weiler> q?
14:33:36 <jeff> q+ to discuss "really hard to go against the pre-agreed consensus"
14:33:37 <dsinger_> ack fanta
14:34:09 <wseltzer> fantasai: not sure how much practical distinction between formal and infrmal meetings
14:34:22 <wseltzer> ... also exception if all participants agree, right?
14:34:32 <wseltzer> ... that should still be allowed
14:34:33 <wseltzer> q+
14:34:34 <dsinger_> q?
14:34:39 <dsinger_> ack wei
14:34:40 <wseltzer> q+ re ordering of exception, rule
14:35:12 <wseltzer> weiler: fantasai seems to capture my sense of pre-existing group wanting to meet
14:35:32 <dsinger_>  	that have not yet been chartered,"
14:35:37 <wseltzer> ... florian, are you describing a case where people would want to participate in WG but have been avoiding prior incubation?
14:37:57 <dsinger_> q?
14:39:08 <dsinger_> ack jeff
14:39:08 <Zakim> jeff, you wanted to discuss "really hard to go against the pre-agreed consensus"
14:39:43 <wseltzer> q-
14:40:48 <wseltzer> jeff: I think the description of social pressure is not fully aligned
14:41:02 <wseltzer> ... there are also long-term incubations
14:41:28 <wseltzer> ... and remote participation is now usually possible for those who can't arrange travel
14:41:32 <dsinger_> q?
14:41:48 <wseltzer> ... we shouldn't block those who are available from meeting
14:42:02 <jeff> +1 to David's suggestion
14:42:10 <wseltzer> dsinger_: maybe we should say that short-scheduled meetings should be open, not restricted to those in the WG
14:42:14 <wseltzer> plh: +1 to that
14:42:25 <wseltzer> dsinger_: think we need to consider how to bring to AB
14:42:44 <jeff> q?
14:42:52 <wseltzer> [I added my comments in https://github.com/frivoal/w3process/commit/68ace68304045c3e59ec624b1e8f97f1635e42f1 ]
14:42:58 <wseltzer> dsinger_: discontinued
14:43:25 <wseltzer> ... suggest addition to the Status indicating why discontinued
14:43:50 <plh> q+
14:43:52 <wseltzer> florian: alternative, not create a new term, and just describe in status
14:43:59 <dsinger_> ack plh
14:44:10 <wseltzer> plh: today, we can mark doc retired
14:44:33 <wseltzer> ... obsolete, superceded, rescinded, so they disappear from default /TR view
14:44:38 <wseltzer> ... and also docs that become WG notes
14:45:01 <wseltzer> ... from publishing perspective, we should ask those publishing the docs to describe their publications
14:45:36 <wseltzer> florian: this issue triggered by someone confused about what the status section means
14:46:07 <wseltzer> dsinger_: look at the issue.
14:46:28 <wseltzer> florian: if we add the sentence, then use "discontinued" consistently
14:47:01 <wseltzer> dsinger_: fine to uise the definition, without the word, too
14:47:30 <wseltzer> dsinger_: substantive changes to charter
14:47:36 <fantasai> Topic: Substantive changes to charter
14:47:45 <wseltzer> ... ready to go?
14:47:47 <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/28
14:48:18 <wseltzer> florian: still have some concern
14:48:50 <cwilso> q+
14:48:55 <jeff> q+
14:49:01 <cwilso> q-
14:49:12 <wseltzer> ... when a charter is substantively changed director must seek re-review
14:49:31 <plh> rrsagent, generate minutes v2
14:49:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/08/26-w3process-minutes.html plh
14:49:58 <wseltzer> jeff: I said essentially, it's a judgment call
14:50:13 <wseltzer> ... if we don't want to leave it there, requires an enumeratioin of all cases, which is quite difficult
14:50:31 <wseltzer> ... dsinger_'s approach enumerated examples, but not claiming to be a comprehensive list
14:50:38 <dsinger_> q?
14:50:39 <fantasai> +!
14:50:41 <dsinger_> ack jef
14:50:41 <fantasai> +1
14:51:15 <wseltzer> florian: if the Director can make changes without telling anyone, we need to know what those cases are
14:51:30 <wseltzer> ... maybe in all cases, Dir must announce
14:51:49 <jrosewell> q+
14:51:50 <wseltzer> ... and then it's okay to have more leeway
14:52:23 <wseltzer> ... Dir must document rationale
14:52:59 <dsinger_> q?
14:53:02 <wseltzer> https://www.w3.org/Guide/process/charter.html#managing-changes
14:53:04 <dsinger_> ack jrose
14:53:13 <wseltzer> ^ Guide on managing changes to charters
14:53:40 <wseltzer> jrosewell: should we focus on processes for Director-free future instead?
14:53:47 <weiler> jrosewell++ for optimism
14:54:00 <wseltzer> dsinger_: we're trying not to introduce new Diretor instances
14:54:13 <dsinger_> q?
14:54:16 <wseltzer> jrosewell: we could park things as not making it worse
14:54:23 <wseltzer> florian: this is still open in Director-free
14:54:30 <wseltzer> ... Formal Objections go to the Council
14:54:46 <wseltzer> ... we haven't yet resolved whether they can only say yes/no, or make changes
14:54:48 <wseltzer> ... we could pund
14:55:00 <wseltzer> s/pund/punt/
14:55:13 <wseltzer> Topic: P2021 milestone
14:55:25 <wseltzer> dsinger_: please look at the milestone ^
14:55:46 <wseltzer> ... Registries, I'm working to simplify what Florian and Fantasai wrote
14:55:50 <wseltzer> ... hope to have for next meeting
14:56:05 <dsinger_> q?
14:56:06 <wseltzer> ... please share input.
14:56:48 <wseltzer> florian: can we look at 438, editorial PR?
14:57:32 <wseltzer> https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/438
14:57:47 <wseltzer> introduces new terms for future reference from Dir-free
14:59:21 <wseltzer> fantasai: +1 to the PR, with Chaals's revision
14:59:29 <jrosewell> +1
14:59:51 <dsinger_> q?
15:00:05 <wseltzer> jeff: think we need substantially shorter note
15:00:53 <wseltzer> fantasai: take PRs on the note. it derived from substantial discussion
15:01:02 <wseltzer> jeff: can't approve without reviewing
15:02:00 <fantasai> chaals's suggestion for shortening was not the not, it was just removing some words earlier in the PR.
15:02:06 <fantasai> s/not the not/not the note/
15:02:23 <wseltzer> dsinger_: net meeting 9 Sept
15:05:21 <dsinger_> next meeting sept 16th!
16:47:38 <tantek> tantek has joined #w3process
17:07:03 <jeff> jeff has joined #w3process
17:10:00 <Zakim> Zakim has left #w3process