Michael Champion

@wseltzer said > This seems overly prescriptive. Agree, as do other commenters. The community around a spec being incubated, with consensus determined by a chair, is the best judge of...

> If that means people can't write code or meet under the banner of the W3C then so be it. As a W3C 'oldbie" I suspect you have a very...

I don't see c) as an option in a director-less organization. NOBODY in my vision of a director-less organization has the power to make a different decision; sustaining a formal...

I see the possible outcomes as: (a) After discussion, a harmonious solution is found and the FO is withdrawn without needing a decision; (b) The FO is denied and the...

@dwsinger wrote > I don't see why they shouldn't be at liberty to say that both the original decision, and the proposed resolution in the FO, are flawed, and our...

@frivoal wrote > But it does seem to me that if we don't give it, at least in some cases, the ability to mandate solutions, the Council is at risk,...

Strongly agree with @travisleithead : > the definition of Working Group (in the Process) be tightened up to exclude these type of non-technical deliverables (principally when they are the only...

@frivoal there's also the question of whether WG's MUST use the Rec Track process to produce their deliverables. @brewerj says above: > Nearly all the work of the (Accessibility) Education...

My concern with the first two bullets is that the Team retains de facto control since the alternative bodies are separate and inevitably weak > Why isn't the AC empowered...

> If we can't have it, do we have the right voting system? No. I will be opposing removing the “one vote per available seat” language until this is resolved....