14:58:00 RRSAgent has joined #w3process 14:58:05 logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/01/14-w3process-irc 14:58:19 zakim, start the meeting 14:58:19 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:58:21 Meeting: Revising W3C Process Community Group 14:58:32 Chair: Brent Zundel 15:01:06 regrets: PLH 15:03:08 present+ 15:05:01 TallTed has joined #w3process 15:07:23 present+ 15:07:28 scribe: Ian 15:07:56 q+ to make a procedural point 15:08:14 agenda+ Update on AB Process Refactoring 15:08:18 present+ 15:08:23 present+ Brent 15:08:26 present+ Francois 15:08:31 ack florian 15:08:31 florian, you wanted to make a procedural point 15:08:31 tidoust has joined #w3process 15:10:21 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/14-w3process-minutes.html TallTed 15:12:11 zakim, take up item 1 15:12:11 agendum 1 -- Update on AB Process Refactoring -- taken up [from Ian] 15:14:47 Brent: One bit of feedback we received is "make it easier to find what we're looking for" 15:14:58 ...and the accessibility folks have some good ideas. 15:15:08 ...we heard (during TPAC) a lot related to horizontal reviews. 15:16:31 ...updating recommendations part of the process is not well-understood (or if understood, not well-liked) 15:17:18 Florian: I have an idea on how to improve "the specs are a mess" 15:17:47 ...writing diffs is hard. Tools could help, but not sure if it's generally do-able (or may need AI) 15:17:54 previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2025/10/22-w3process-minutes.html 15:17:54 next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/02/11-w3process-minutes.html 15:18:55 q+ 15:19:55 (Some discussion about whether people know the options for doing revisions) 15:20:36 q+ 15:20:43 ack Ian 15:20:50 q+ 15:22:15 Ian: can we hear the big themes? From what I heard so far (and would add my own thoughts): 15:22:22 * Horz reviews 15:22:24 * Maintenance 15:22:27 * Rechartering 15:22:29 ack florian 15:22:32 * Usability of materails 15:22:54 Ian: Now is a good time to develop a plan, prioritize for 2026 15:23:32 ack tidoust 15:23:40 Florian: Regarding "going back to CR" there are challenges for some groups (e.g., CSS) but if there's not a challenge with changing status, going back to CR is often the right solution 15:24:17 Francois: Some feedback I have heard about proposed amendments is that they did not understand the different implications between staying at Rec and going back to CR. 15:24:27 (Brent continues reviewing main themes) 15:24:51 Brent: Some challenges around Formal Objections. In some cases it feels like input (FO) is coming in too late. 15:25:08 ...can be frustrating to get feedback just before a deadline from people who have not been involved in work. 15:25:55 ...it's also difficult to track the process of handling Formal Objections 15:26:30 Brent: Another theme is rechartering. People ask "why are we doing this every two years." 15:27:00 scribe+ 15:27:34 Ian: I think that's a great topic to revisit, e.g., building on the example of the CSS WG, which is a "super" group, which might be a direction to look into. 15:27:45 ... Staff resource allocation is another thing to look at, perhaps. 15:28:14 ... We could envision that once work has been ongoing for some time, you get a "free pass" to continue the work 15:28:19 ... Just ideas. 15:28:49 Brent: We did hear some other pain points about rechartering, but the Process has improved since those events. The AB does not think much will need to be done around recharerting. 15:29:11 Brent: There are some smaller bits on IE, CoC, registries (but not concentrated feedback on this topic) 15:29:49 Florian: CR drafts are partly for morality --> Going back to WD is possible but feels like a regression. 15:30:25 Brent: The plan moving forward for the AB: we have a FTF meeting in early February. Refactoring will be an important part of that agenda. 15:30:37 ...Tess has taken the lead on the refactoring work item 15:30:49 ...I am working on this as well. 15:30:59 ...we are hoping to identify and make resolutions on low-hanging fruit. 15:31:23 ..the AB is looking for some easy wins. 15:31:43 ...there seem to be places where tooling changes would be very helpful (e.g., horz reviews, FO handling) 15:32:12 Florian: Would you consider submitting feedback to the team? They might have other ideas (e.g., more tooling) than changes to the Process. 15:32:31 Brent: The AB plans to do this: 15:32:49 * Write down problem statements 15:33:06 * Offer suggestions from the AB's perspective as input to: the process CG, the Team 15:34:27 q+ 15:34:29 Ian: Will the AB "shut down" some topics or say "We heard some feedback but don't think it's a priority" 15:34:52 Brent: My hope is that by the end of the Feb FTF meeting we have a solid list of problem statements. 15:35:02 ...and ideally a couple of ideas for how to solve them. 15:35:17 q+ to mention breakouts day 15:35:45 Brent: I want to see solutions emerge from a dialog 15:35:51 q? 15:35:56 ack for 15:35:59 ack florian 15:36:17 florian: Sounds great. Please do share the problem statements even if you don't have suggestions for addressing them. 15:36:26 ack me 15:36:26 Ian, you wanted to mention breakouts day 15:36:37 ack Ian 15:37:20 Ian: Breakouts Day might be a way for the AB to get feedback on problem statements. 15:38:14 Topic: Process PRs 15:39:01 topic: https://github.com/w3c/process/pulls 15:39:49 q+ 15:40:33 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/937 15:40:53 Github: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/937 15:40:59 Florian: There was a recent discussion that did not yet converge. I think there is going to be a survey to gather more information. 15:41:16 ...let's postpone this one. 15:41:28 Brent: Yes, Board and AB are looking at this. 15:41:49 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1021 15:41:55 Github: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1021 15:41:58 q+ 15:42:29 ack florian 15:42:38 ack me 15:42:38 ack Ian 15:45:50 Ian: Given recent work to help the community understand the respective roles of the Board and AB, I think we should revisit this text and leverage the recent efforts to clarify roles. 15:46:08 +1 15:48:12 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/14-w3process-minutes.html TallTed 15:48:43 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1129 15:48:47 Github: https://github.com/w3c/process/pull/1129 15:49:01 s/florian, you wanted to make a procedural point/ 15:50:05 Florian: PSIG is discussing this and has not yet converged. But one note is that prior to 2019 there was no formal rule about what to do regarding non-Member contributions , and the PP FAQ explained that it's the responsibility of a WG Chair to do the right thing. In 2019 a formal rule was introduced but the PP FAQ was not updated. 15:50:56 q+ 15:51:22 Brent: My first reaction is that the PSIG should update the FAQ 15:51:41 ack Ian 15:55:05 Ian: Two areas of concern for me include (1) where rules should reside [IMO, should not be in the process] and (2) who has responsibilities (e.g., Chairs v. Team) 15:55:15 Brent: Since PSIG is discussion, let's await their findings. 15:55:38 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/14-w3process-minutes.html Ian 15:56:20 Topic: Propose to close items 15:56:43 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/328 15:56:46 Github: https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/328 15:57:16 Brent: TAG and AB are invited to review charters. 15:57:40 ...especially if there are Formal Objections 15:57:55 ...so it feels this issue has been superseded by events and can be closed. 15:58:03 Florian: +1 to closing. (And the other two as well) 15:58:31 Florian: I think there were multiple meanings to "formally review"; only one meaning has been addressed (but others not pushed forward) 15:58:38 (No objections to closing 328) 15:58:53 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/414 15:58:56 Github: https://github.com/w3c/process/issues/414 15:59:24 q+ 15:59:36 ack Ian 16:00:46 Ian: Is there a stronger characterization that "WG for things that get implemented" while "IG are for other things, such as guidelines"? 16:00:50 Ian: I am ok to close this issue 16:01:10 (No objections to closing 414) 16:01:28 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/14-w3process-minutes.html Ian 16:01:37 RRSAGENT, set logs public