jeffjaffe

@mnot I initially shared many of your concerns, but I believe that @dwsinger accurately describes the tone and substance of the AB discussions - which have made me more comfortable...

Thanks @dbaron . I agree that the Team cannot exercise chartering functions in exactly the same way in a Director-free consortium. Today, if there is a formal objection to a...

Indeed charter drafting is often done today by the community in CGs, IGs, and WGs.

Thanks, @michaelchampion . I'll try to schedule time in the next few months for the AB and other stakeholders (e.g. you, Daniel, Mark, and Tantek to discuss these issues.

@frivoal I agree that we should simplify Section 9. The first two and last paragraph can probably be collapsed into one paragraph - the current second paragraph is the one...

Thanks, @michaelchampion for these thoughts. I do agree with you that the Council is a bit bulky for handling formal objections. But I'm struggling with the alternatives. A primary reason,...

Rather than addressing this question in general, I would like to comment on Process 2022 specifically. For Process 2022 there is a great deal of momentum to revamp the process...

In general, W3C's preference has been to work in the public. Specifically, for our process evolution, we have operated in public for many years. The results have been (imho) quite...

> Doesn't this relate to the authority of the group chair(s) to make decisions? I would have thought group chair(s) would be aware of the issues associated with meeting arrangements...

Today before a team sends a charter for AC review, it goes through various reviews including W3M review (to assess maturity, feasibility, known problems, team resources assigned, etc.) as well...