Thank you for investing your time in contribution to the WebID Community Group!
This group is governed by lazy consensus as defined in the W3C Process Document. What follows is a selection of quotes from that document which summarize how the group makes decisions. Please refer to the Process Document for more information.
Consensus is a core value of W3C. To promote consensus, the W3C process requires Chairs to ensure that groups consider all legitimate views and objections, and endeavor to resolve them, whether these views and objections are expressed by the active participants of the group or by others [...]
Where unanimity is not possible, a group should strive to make consensus decisions where there is significant support and few abstentions.
Chairs [...] may use [...] “lazy consensus”, in which lack of objection after sufficient notice is taken as assent;
The Chair may record a decision where there is dissent so that the group can make progress (for example, to produce a deliverable in a timely manner). Dissenters cannot stop a group’s work simply by saying that they cannot live with a decision.
A group should only conduct a vote to resolve a substantive issue after the Chair has determined that all available means of reaching consensus through technical discussion and compromise have failed, and that a vote is necessary to break a deadlock.
In order to be a substantive contributor to work items, you must be a member of the CG. It’s easy to join the CG if you’d like to contribute. People agree to the W3C Community License Agreement (CLA) upon joining the CG.
If you'd like help troubleshooting a pull request (PR) you're working on, have a great new idea, or want to share implementation feedback, join us in any of the following venues:
Issues are used to track tasks that contributors can help with.
If you've found something in any of the working items within this repository, search open issues to see if someone else has reported the same thing. If it's something new, open an issue. We'll use the issue to have a conversation about the problem you want to fix.
If you find an issue to work on, you are welcome to open a PR with a fix. The group will then decide whether to reject it, merge it or ask for further modifications. Regardless of your standing within the WebID CG or the W3C organization, PRs must always originate from forks of this repository.
Issues are tracked and discussed on GitHub.
It is the chair's responsibility to ensure that each PR is adequately discussed before merging or rejecting it.
The chair must, for each PR, call upon members to provide their feedback and let their objections known, if any. The chair must do so in a broad manner, such that even a casual participant of the CG is likely to participate in the process.
For any given PR, the chair must clearly communicate the date by which members must let their objections known. This date, to be communicated in writing as a comment to the PR itself, must be either 2 weeks or 4 weeks after the PR's opening date, depending on the extent and significance of the proposed change.
In addition, the chair must, on a weekly basis, provide the group with an overview of the issues, PRs and discussions to be reviewed during the following week. These overviews must be shared via the CG's mailing list.
The chair must always document the decisions and disagreements leading to the merging or rejection of a PR. The chair must do so through chair's notes documents living within this repository.
The opinions of CG members may carry particular weight, whether they are expressed within our community or elsewhere. As a CG member:
- It is assumed you are speaking as an individual unless you state otherwise.
- If you want to express the opinion of your organisation or a group you are affiliated with, make it clear before you state their view.
- Do not use phrases like "on behalf of the CG" or "the CG thinks that" unless the group has asked you to do so.
- When communicating CG decisions, provide references to what was decided and what was not decided.