Don't say that dissent goes away when it's overruled

[jyasskin]

---

Preview | Diff

[nigelmegitt]

I don't read the previous text as saying that the dissent went away when it's overruled. This change doesn't look meaningful, or particularly harmful to me. Please could you explain the motivation for the change @jyasskin ?

[nigelmegitt]

Re @nigelmegitt, the existing text says that "dissent" can be restated as "there were Formal Objections, at least some of which were sustained". That implies that, if there were formal objections that were all overruled, there isn't dissent. But that's not true, so I suggested this change to avoid that implication.

We do define "dissent" as "At least one individual in the set sustains an objection.", but that's a different meaning of "sustain" than the one used when dealing with formal objections.

Thanks @jyasskin it seems that you and I are not interpreting "sustained" the same way, and that's a pointer that clarification is needed. By my reading, the fact that a formal objection has been overruled does not imply that it is not "sustained" by the objector. I understood this to mean that at least some objections were not withdrawn, which I think is the intended meaning.

[dwsinger]

I think I agree with Nigel. The question of whether the objector sustains their objection lies solely with the objector. Whether they prevail in their objection is a question of what decision is reached, which does not lie with them.

[jyasskin]

I note that the Process's definition of "sustain" is about formal objections. It would be possible to change that word globally, but probably easier to change the word used for persistent dissent.

[TallTed]

interpreting "sustained"

Generally speaking, an "objection" is either "sustained" or "overruled". The latter two words do not describe the objector's action; they describe the evaluator/adjudicator's action.

I don't understand why or how "sustained" is being ascribed to the objector.

[dwsinger]

you're right, we could use the word in both senses (does the objector sustain the objection, does the Council sustain or overrule). that's potentially confusing.

[fantasai]

Note: We're proposing to change "sustain" to "uphold" when referring to a Council Decision, to resolve this and other confusion in the Process, see https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/746

With that out of the way, I think we should accept this change, because the resulting text is more straightforward.