On 25 Feb 2009, at 8:32 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
On 25 Feb 2009, at 15:32, Ian Jacobs wrote:
On 25 Feb 2009, at 6:57 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
Hello,
I think it could improve both the perceived and actual
transparency and accountability of the W3C as a whole to have what
I've tentatively called an "Audit Board". An Audit Board would be
charged with investigating specific incidents and situations and
producing a report and making recommendations.
Bijan,
Can you provide more information about the situation(s) that led to
this proposal? Feel free to contact me offlist.
The immediate impetus was this email:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0119.html
I first aired the idea in:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0120.html
I don't know it has to be an AB per se...perhaps we have too many
groups :) I just find myself doing list forensics a bunch these days
and wish that the body of knowledge of dysfunction and how to deal
with it were systematized in a best practices document (with
supporting cases).
We have a place for that sort of information: the chairs' guide. If
you wish to write
down your experience / observations somewhere and you wish to share
it, I
can link to it.
_ Ian
--
Ian Jacobs ([email protected]) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel: +1 718 260 9447
