Be more specific about when the council composition is locked down #955
Conversation
|
Unless there is new information by December 20, this pull request will get merged. |
| Specifically, the list of potential [=Council=] members evolves | ||
| as terms start or end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Specifically, the list of potential [=Council=] members evolves | |
| as terms start or end | |
| The list of potential [=Council=] members evolves | |
| as terms start and end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok with swapping or for and, but why remove specifically? My intent was to indicate that this is a clarification of the previous sentence, rather than an additional requirement. I guess I'd be ok with turning the period at the end of the previous sentence into a colon instead of saying Specifically at the start of the next one, but having neither weakens the link between the two statements.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The sentence that begins with Specifically does not describe a refinement of — i.e., something more specific than — the sentence beginning with Membership. Rather, the two sentences each discuss a different aspect of Council formation and membership. Note that the second sentence speaks of potential [=Council=] members, while the first sentence speaks of Membership of each [=Council=] instance. Membership of each [=Council=] instance obviously derives from potential [=Council=] members, but potential [=Council=] members is less specific than Membership of each [=Council=] instance.
My point might be clarified (and a better fix achieved) by adjusting the entire paragraph, along the lines of —
A distinct instance of the [=W3C Council=] is convened
for each decision being appealed or objected to.
The list of potential [=Council=] members evolves
as [=AB=] and [=TAG=] terms start and end
until [=dismissal=] is concluded,
and is fixed thereafter.
Membership of each [=Council=] instance is fixed at formation,
and is not changed by any [=AB=] or [=TAG=] elections
occurring before that Council has reached a conclusion.
However, if participation in a [=Council=] falls
so low as to hinder effective and balanced deliberations,
the [=W3C Council Chair=] <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
dissolve the [=Council=]
and call for a new one to be convened.
I am left wondering how participation [could fall] so low, as it is clearly not by AB or TAG terms/elections. Maybe "participation" in this case actually means "active participation", distinct from "membership"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am left wondering how participation [could fall] so low, as it is clearly not by AB or TAG terms/elections. Maybe "participation" in this case actually means "active participation", distinct from "membership"?
That is indeed the intended meaning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is intended as a clarification of what "at formation" means. Dismissal+renunciation is what turns potential members into actual ones. As long as it hasn't occurred, potential members can be added or removed (by terms ending or starting), but once we've decided on who (if any) is removed, then the (actual, not potential) list of member is fixed, and no longer changes.
How about:
A distinct instance of the [=W3C Council=] is convened
for each decision being appealed or objected to.
The list of potential [=Council=] members evolves
as [=AB=] and [=TAG=] terms start and end
until [=dismissal=] and [=renunciation=] are concluded;
thereafter, the membership of the [=Council=] is fixed,
and is not changed by any [=AB=] or [=TAG=] elections
occurring before that Council has reached a conclusion.
However, if active participation in a [=Council=] falls
so low as to hinder effective and balanced deliberations,
the [=W3C Council Chair=] <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
dissolve the [=Council=]
and call for a new one to be convened.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The part I see missing is when and how potential [=Council=] members become the membership of the [=Council=] — presuming that the latter is a subset of the former.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The part I see missing is when and how potential [=Council=] members become the membership of the [=Council=] — presuming that the latter is a subset of the former.
By neither being dismissed nor renouncing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh! I think this gets us closer. It might need something about how the membership of a [=Council=] might decrease after it is fixed.
A distinct instance of the [=W3C Council=] is convened
for each decision being appealed or objected to.
The list of potential [=Council=] members evolves
as [=AB=] and [=TAG=] terms start and end
until [=dismissal=] and [=renunciation=] are concluded,
at which point all remaining potential [=Council=]
members become full members; thereafter, the membership
of the [=Council=] is fixed, and is not changed by any
[=AB=] or [=TAG=] elections that occur before that
Council has reached a conclusion. However, if the number
of active members in a [=Council=] falls so low as to
hinder effective and balanced deliberations, the
[=Council Chair=] <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
dissolve the [=Council=] and call for a new one to be
convened.
(I also deleted W3C from [=W3C Council Chair=], as it seems odd when only the first [=W3C Council=] mention includes W3C. All other [=Council=] clearly mean [=W3C Council=], and I think it's clear that [=Council Chair=] means [=W3C Council Chair=].)
This drafts option 1 of #926
Preview | Diff