charles@97: charles@97: charles@96: charles@97: charles@96: charles@96: charles@96: 8 Advisory Committee Reviews, Appeals, and Votes charles@96: charles@96: charles@96: charles@99: charles@99: charles@96: charles@96: charles@96:
charles@96: charles@96:
charles@101:

Editor's draft proposed new W3C Process Document

charles@96:

8 Advisory Committee Reviews, charles@96: Appeals, and Votes

charles@96:
charles@96: charles@96:
charles@96: charles@96: charles@96:

This section describes how the Advisory Committee reviews proposals from the charles@96: Director and how Advisory Committee representatives appeal W3C decisions and charles@96: decisions by the Director. A W3C decision is one where the Director (or the charles@96: Director's delegate) has exercised the role of assessing consensus after an charles@96: Advisory Committee review of an Activity Proposal, after a Call for Review of a Proposed Recommendation, after a charles@96: Call for Review of a Proposed Recommendation, charles@96: after a Proposal to Rescind a W3C charles@96: Recommendation, and after a Proposed charles@96: Process Document review.

charles@96:

8.1 Advisory Committee Reviews

charles@96:

The Advisory Committee reviews:

charles@96: charles@96:

8.1.1 Start of a Review charles@96: Period

charles@96:

Each Advisory Committee review period begins with a Call for Review from the charles@96: Team to the Advisory Committee. The review charles@96: form describes the proposal, raises attention to deadlines, estimates when charles@96: the decision will be available, and includes other practical information. Each charles@96: Member organization MAY send one review, which charles@96: MUST be returned by its Advisory Committee charles@96: representative.

charles@96:

The Team MUST provide two channels for Advisory charles@96: Committee review comments:

charles@96:
    charles@96:
  1. an archived Team-only channel; this is charles@96: the default channel for reviews.
  2. charles@96:
  3. an archived Member-only channel.
  4. charles@96:
charles@96:

Reviewers MAY send information to either or charles@96: both channels. They MAY also share their reviews charles@96: with other Members on the Advisory charles@96: Committee discussion list.

charles@96:

A Member organization MAY modify its review charles@96: during a review period (e.g., in light of comments from other Members).

charles@96:

8.1.2 After the Review charles@96: Period

charles@96:

After the review period, the Director MUST charles@96: announce to the Advisory Committee the level of support for the proposal charles@96: (consensus or dissent). The Director MUST also indicate whether there were any Formal Objections, charles@96: with attention to changing charles@96: confidentiality level. This W3C decision is charles@96: generally one of the following:

charles@96:
    charles@96:
  1. The proposal is approved, possibly with minor changes integrated.
  2. charles@96:
  3. The proposal is approved, possibly with substantive changes integrated. In this case charles@96: the Director's announcement MUST include rationale charles@96: for the decision to advance the document despite the proposal for a substantive charles@96: change.
  4. charles@96:
  5. The proposal is returned for additional work, with a request to the charles@96: initiator to formally address charles@96: certain issues.
  6. charles@96:
  7. The proposal is rejected.
  8. charles@96:
charles@96:

This document does not specify time intervals between the end of an Advisory charles@96: Committee review period and the W3C decision. charles@96: This is to ensure that the Members and Team have sufficient time to consider charles@96: comments gathered during the review. The Advisory Committee SHOULD NOT expect an announcement sooner than two weeks after the end of a Proposed Recommendation charles@96: review period. If, after three weeks, the charles@96: Director has not announced the outcome, the Director SHOULD provide the Advisory Committee with an update.

charles@96:

8.2 Appeal by Advisory Committee charles@96: Representatives

charles@96:

Advisory Committee representatives MAY appeal charles@96: certain decisions, though appeals are only expected to occur in extraordinary charles@96: circumstances.

charles@96:

When Advisory Committee review immediately precedes a decision, Advisory charles@96: Committee representatives MAY only appeal when charles@96: there is dissent. These decisions charles@96: are:

charles@96: charles@96:

Advisory Committee representatives MAY always charles@96: appeal the following decisions:

charles@96: charles@96:

In all cases, an appeal MUST be initiated charles@96: within three weeks of the decision.

charles@96:

An Advisory Committee representative initiates an appeal by sending a charles@96: request to the Team (explained in detail in the New Member Orientation). The Team charles@96: MUST announce the appeal process to the Advisory charles@96: Committee and provide an address for comments from Advisory Committee charles@96: representatives. The archive of these comments MUST be Member-visible. If, within one week of the Team's announcement, 5% or more of the charles@96: Advisory Committee support the appeal request, the Team MUST organize an appeal vote asking the Advisory Committee to charles@96: approve or reject the decision.

charles@96:

8.3 Advisory Committee Votes

charles@96:

The Advisory Committee votes in elections for seats on the TAG or Advisory charles@96: Board, and in the event of a formal appeal of a W3C decision. Whenever the Advisory Committee votes, charles@96: each Member or group of related charles@96: Members has one vote. In the case of Advisory Board and TAG elections, "one charles@96: vote" means "one vote per available seat".

charles@96:
charles@96: charles@96:
charles@96: charles@96: