Meeting minutes
Revisit the purpose of the AB
<fantasai> Prior discussion on this topic
Angel: Welcome all, this meeting is under the code of conduct
… Wendy my co-chair will introduce the AB as starter
… then we'll discuss
wendyreid: AB is an 11-seat body, elected members by the AC
… 2-year terms, staggered
… participate as individuals
… distinct from BoD
… no decision-making
… operate transparently
… AB described in the process document
The Advisory Board provides ongoing guidance to the Team on issues of strategy, management, legal matters, process, and conflict resolution. The Advisory Board also serves the Members by tracking issues raised between Advisory Committee meetings, soliciting Member comments on such issues, and proposing actions to resolve these issues.
https://
wendyreid: we want to talk about this because this description hasn't changed since process 2005
… scope of the AB include being a part of W3C Councils
… we also work on the Vision document, process and code of conduct
… we also choose our own yearly priorities
… we connect members and team
… [being on the AB]
… 4-6 hours per week
… we work in English
… non-native speakers probably need more time
… we have twice monthly conference calls for one hour
… 3 or 4 times a year we hold a 3-day f2f meeting and we rotate locations; these are hybrid
… [2025 priorities]
… [Wendy reads https://
… [working with the W3C community]
====
wendyreid: what we want to focus on for this session
How would you expect the AB to play their role in W3C community?
Is there anything in the AB's role that should be changed?
What are the unique values the AB can have for the community?
What tasks would you like the AB to take up, if AB has not yet?
How would you expect the AB to collaborate with other elected W3C groups, such as TAG and the Board?
Any other suggestions for the AB role/work scope?
====
discussion
wendyreid: thanks Angel who put together this presentation for me to present
alan_stearns: thanks for the improved communications I've seen about the AB deliberations
… posting what you're going to talk about and the summary
… this is really helpful
… I wonder if some of the things you have discussed and wondered what the AC things, if there should be more specific things stirred on the ac list
… of if you are trying to push discussion on GH instead of the mailing list
wendyreid: what we want is more feedback, more input
… we can only make recommendations,
… we can make far better ones when we know where people are at
<fantasai> +100%
wendyreid: we can't be speaking for everyone
… we should do more to solicit the AC
… especially on some big topics we are wrestling with
… we want opinions
… that make discussion more useful
… there's good engagement in email so long as people are respectful
… we see some engagement on GH but not a ton
… is it worth doing in both venues?
… or should we push in more direction?
AvneeshSingh: it's about preferences.
… in email I gave links to GH recently to offer a choice
… express your preference
Alan_Stearns: Mine is GH issues, personally
… I'm usually a lurker
… not sure how you can change how you work to elicit more feedback from me due to my lurking tendency
… Also, we've elected the AB to advise, represent us. I vote for people whose opinions I value
… I often defer to them
… have your opinions
… state your opinions
… don't waffle on
<Zakim> nigel, you wanted to mention about advice
Alan_Stearns: maybe you won't get the feedback you want, because the feedback was that you got elected
nigel: how does the AB decide what it wants to provide advice on?
… how does one put things on the list of AB to consider?
… technical questions should go to TAG
… which means the AB should be considering more matters of what makes a standards organization run well
… and be useful
… that sort of things
… internal working
… that sort of things. External as well in some fashion
… I've seen the 3 Is
… that interests me
… how did this get there? AB priority
… as people must have asked in the past
… if there are edge cases regarding 3Is, the AB might be a good body to adjudicate
… instead of the TAG
<Zakim> wendyreid, you wanted to try and answer Nigel
nigel: I'm curious how the things get on the list of things for the AB to consider
wendyreid: when we have the priorities discussion
… it's been talking about problems that we see
… problems that affect us
… as some of us are in groups, are chairs
… the "squishy" bits of the technical work
… agree, it should not go to the TAG
… like the 3Is
… that has tech implications but also community and process, so that's where we come in to help
… our priorities come from that
… hence focus in the last year on "working with the TAG"
fantasai: AB Members come to the AB with an idea or project they want to work on, or issues they want to resolve
… another way is when the Team brings topics they want AB advice on
… third way is when the AC or community ask us to work on things
<cwilso> +1 Elika
fantasai: I encourage the team members to come to us for anything they think we might help with
… not wait for the CEO to bring it on their behalf
amy: I have a recollection of Seth at the first AB f2f he attended
… asking what the hoped the AB might work on
… including relevance of W3C and the technical future
… regarding the team asking advice
… we've had great experience and fruitful discussions
… e.g., Branding TF, structure of meetings, external communications
… the Team does ask the AB
… we work to help address that
angel: I want to continue the discussion but before that, if we look at the Process description of the AB
… there are pieces of work the AB manages
… e.g., process document
… it's done collaboratively through CGs
… in a way, these CGs are working like a sub-committee of the AB with broader participation
… if we could form a stable mechanism
… we could get formalised relationships
… it would be great
angel: also for the technical part
… I recently had a conversation with someone from another standards org
… they decided to dive all in in AI area
… their membership formed a technical advisory group
… to come up with technical roadmaps
… I don't think W3C has that
… I wonder, and it doesn't have to be the AB alone
… but how can the W3C Team look at the emerging tech?
<Zakim> nigel, you wanted to come back to fantasai - is the AB there to represent AC to the Team, or to advise the wider community?
nigel: the AB seems to be doing multiple things
… communication roles with different parties
… I noticed the AB seems to be treated as a repesentative groups from the AC
… including to the Team
… one of the general issue with the AC is it's hard to engage with the AC
<astearns> forming an advisory group on a particular technical topic is a good idea, but probably separate from our current AB. We’d want to form a group on a particular topic to select experts in that topic
nigel: and answers are not straightforward
… that's one role I see for the AB
… also a wider role to guide on things of interest
… I'm not clear how that part works
… who is the AB for is a useful question
… efforts to bridge the community and the Team, from the questions on the slide
… maybe it needs to be clearer on what to expect
<Zakim> amy, you wanted to react to nigel
<angel> +1 to astearns about separate from our current AB, the AB can faciliate the forming of such tech advisory group
fantasai: we think of the AB as an executive committee of the AC
… but that's not the only thing we do
… the AB advocates for the effectiveness of W3C as an org
… it's what ties all the things that we do
<cwilso> +1 Elika. :)
fantasai: through advising Team, developing Process, code, guidelines, etc.
… we do a lot of different things, but generally fits under that mission. By contrast, TAG's mission is to advocate for integrity of the technical architecture of the Web.
nigel: if you're the executive committee of the AC, I think this is defined
… the mechanism for consulting back with the AC is very important
… otherwise you can't represent them
fantasai: there is room for improvement
… but we have conversations
… in spaces where the AC can participate
… lot of porosity
… summarising meetings to the AC, helps do that at a higher level
… we could make better use of surveys
… we have an election cycle every year
… it's somewhat frequent
<Zakim> amy, you wanted to mention representing AC to Team also
<amy> I don't quite agree with the characterization that the AB's role is to "bridge W3C community and the Team". Team and AC are very connected. It would be negative if the AB saw itself as in between AC and Team.
fantasai: another dynamic is election of individuals by AC Reps, as Alan mentioned, to do the work so they don't have to
<amy> I'm hearing "represent" AC but to me, this seems unclear. The role in the Process is "The Advisory Board also serves the Members by tracking issues raised between Advisory Committee meetings, soliciting Member comments on such issues, and proposing actions to resolve these issues."
Amy: In addition I heard "represent"
… it seems unclear
… process says "serve the members"
… track things, get comments, etc.
… some of the way I hear some of these is slightly off center
… team and AC are quite connected already
… if it's in addition that's fine
… othewise I wanted to push back
wendyreid: this is why it's important to have this discussion
… things have changed
… the AB definition in the process hasn't changed
… but things changed and our roles have changed
… I don't see ourselves as an executive committee of the AC
… I wasn't an AC rep
… I'm a chair
… our connection to the AC is incredibly important
… but I think our proper role is to represent the community at large
<fantasai> +1 to representing community at large, not just AC
wendyreid: by being good stewards of the community we get the support of the AC who elect us
… I don't see us as arbiter of the AC
<amy> the role of the Team is "The Team provides technical leadership about Web technologies, organizes and manages W3C activities to reach goals within practical constraints (such as resources available), and communicates with the Members and the public about the Web and W3C technologies." https://
wendyreid: it's a greatly integrated ecosystem with interdependencies
… we have so much integration with the Team
astearns: I want to pushback a bit on the assertion that the Team is connected to the AC
<amy> thank you Alan, i hear you on this and i think it should be improved!
astearns: I see much more communications from the AB than from the Team
nigel: I want to ask a provocative question
… if the AB disappeared, what would we lose?
<astearns> process maintenance?
angel: there's a BoD with authority, groups working on spec development
… the AB is in the middle
… if it functions well, it is a central nerve of the membership
… a group of people stably taking care of issues
… valuable for the community to have a group in the middle
… if the effort is more from the membership side, it's valuable
… and saves time from the Team; how do we effectively collaborate and find the right boundaries
AvneeshSingh: role of the AB as a kind of council for the Team and for the BoD also
… a council of people with diverse skill sets
… because when decisions need to be made, many perspectives need to considered
… different backgrounds, different skill sets
wendyreid: I want to give a spicy answer to this question that I like
… in my own capacity
… if the AB disappeared, in some ways, nothing would change
… in some ways things might get easier, or be more difficult or challenging
… we want the vision, the process, the code of conduct to happen
… but because of the lack of clarity and the changes, we got stuck a bit
… renewed clarity, renewed scope
… give us new purpose
… 7 seats coming up at this election
… big shift
… a renewed purpose is exciting
astearns: I really like the question too
… one way to answer could be for the AB to choose one thing and see who yells about the things you dropped
wendyreid: I like it
… thanks, great conversation
fantasai: we should add community engagement on the list of things as we frequently advise
… also we should have an overarching statement
… because the TAG does
… and the AB doesn't
… suggest adopting what Chris said: the AB advocates for the effectiveness of W3C as an organization. Because that ties together everything we do.
wendyreid: we're going to continue the conversation
… including after the AC meeting in two weeks.