Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inaccurate text about Membership Agreements #879

Open
hober opened this issue May 31, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Inaccurate text about Membership Agreements #879

hober opened this issue May 31, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@hober
Copy link
Member

hober commented May 31, 2024

In the un-numbered section named "Relation of Process Document to Patent Policy and Other Policies," the first sentence reads:

W3C Members' attention is called to the fact that provisions of the Process Document are binding on Members per the Membership Agreement [MEMBER-AGREEMENT].

This implies two things, both of which are demonstrably false:

  1. That there is one, singular Membership Agreement, when in fact there are (unfortunately) many.
  2. That the one, singular Membership Agreement is the linked document.

The (as I said, unfortunate) reality is that there are a number of Membership Agreements. I don't know offhand how many, but "several" is not an incorrect depiction. I also don't know offhand if all of them make the Process Document binding on Members in the way that this text presumes. (I sure hope they do!)

While in the long term it would be best to reduce the number of active Membership Agreements to one, in the short term it would be nice if this text were updated to be accurate. As it stands, a Member representative could click on the above link and think that the resulting document is the one that binds her organization, when it very well may not be.

@hober hober changed the title Inaccurate text about Member Agreements Inaccurate text about Membership Agreements May 31, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants