From 3b49714a1602c0f5f0a4a83a232cbbad05399041 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Florian Rivoal Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 14:13:24 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Define recusal as per AB resolution on 2019-06-17 Closes #278. Keeps an inline issue about an unresolved subissue. --- index.bs | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/index.bs b/index.bs index 431e7a92..5deb389b 100644 --- a/index.bs +++ b/index.bs @@ -2290,11 +2290,22 @@ Addressing Formal Objections * the members of the [=Advisory Board=] * the members of the [=Technical Architecture Group=] - A recusal is required for any of these - directly involved in the matter of the [=Formal Objection=] - (e.g. that they are a chair, and it is their decision that is in question, - or they are the individual who registered the [=Formal Objection=]); - other members may recuse themselves if they feel there could be a reasonable perception that they are directly involved. + Participants in the [=W3C Council=] must [=recuse=] themselves + if they are the person who issued the decision being objected to, + or if they are the person who registered the [=Formal Objection=]. + Participants may also [=recuse=] themselves for any reason. + Any person who has recused themself + does not take part in its deliberations, + determination of consensus, + or votes + on this matter. + The [=W3C Council=] may still solicit and hear their testimony, + as they can of anyone else in the W3C community. + + Issue: It is still an open question whether someone who has recused themself + should still be allowed to participate in the deliberations of the Council + even if they are excluded from the consensus/vote. + The CEO appoints the Chair of the W3C Council, with the advice of the rest of the Council. This may be the CEO themself,