W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > September 2008

Re: canceling 17 Sept. call; next one on 1 Oct.

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:00:18 +0200
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org, Christopher Testa <ctesta@ushmm.org>
Message-Id: <3B0AC382-BB1E-463B-B368-4F67DAB663AD@w3.org>
To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>

Hi Owen,

Sorry for the late reply. I was traveling and offline most of the time.

El 15/09/2008, a las 19:13, Owen Ambur escribió:
> Jose, I'm beginning to get the sense the eGov IG may be foundering,  
> perhaps
> because the scope of the Group Outline may be too large.
> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/GroupOutline

Thanks for bringing up the subject. It is the first time we hear  
someone in the Group talking about it since we announced it last week.

Do you think that it's just too large or do you have any additional  
comments about its organization? Do you think the steps described  
there are the right ones and in the right order?


> My suggestion would be to include *only* those objectives for which  
> at least
> one person has indicated willingness and ability to complete the  
> required
> tasks.

My main concern so far about the Group it's been its scope. An issue  
we've been facing at W3C since we started to look into this was that  
eGovernment as topic is *huge* and I believe that if we want to  
succeed in the short term, the Group needs to be very well focused.  
Unfortunately, I don't believe we are yet.

Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me. It was the Chairs' original  
goal to do it this way, hence we choose TF coordinators as owners of  
the task topics. Unfortunately, it's taking too long for people to  
tell them if they'd like to cooperate on that given topic, and summer  
in the northern hemisphere has not helped either.

I encourage the TF coordinators to take ownership of the topics, go  
ahead on their own and hope others will join the TFs to help them.  
Fortunately, some have already showed interest and I hope those will  
fulfill the requirements you suggest above.

Chairs are arranging a call with TF coordinators asap to talk about  
this, and some more changes are coming very soon.


> Regarding standards, I'd suggest that we start with the U.S. Federal
> Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Technical Reference Model (TRM) and  
> identify
> W3C Recommendations as well as OASIS standards that are not in the  
> TRM but
> should be.  See http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#FEAPMO &
> http://www.w3.org/TR/ & http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php
>
> I would describe the intended result as a strategic plan for
> interoperability, and if the IG decides to take on this task, I am  
> more than
> willing and able to:
>
> a) assist in identifying standards missing from the TRM,
>
> b) document the results in StratML format, and
>
> c) on behalf of the IG, use the ET.gov site/process to propose  
> inclusion of
> the identified standards in the TRM.

I know that you and others in the Group are very knowledgeable of the  
US Federal Government stuff. I welcome the opinion of those about this.

In my opinion, some of the steps would be a bit tricky for us to  
accomplish. Although I can understand a) and that could be done with  
OASIS help (we'd need to check with them) I'm not aware of all the  
implications of going through b) and c).

Where's the existing list?

I see you are skipping here most of the preliminary steps in the Group  
Outline (stories and the like) and going directly to some of the  
specific issues already identified in the charter and giving a very  
concrete case. Do you think it's better to do our work this way?

Anyway, this is at last a very specific proposal that I welcome and  
would like to see others discussing.

Thanks,
Jose.

--
Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>    W3C/CTIC
eGovernment Lead                  http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/


> Owen Ambur
> Co-Chair Emeritus, xmlCoP
> Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee
> Member, AIIM iECM Committee
> Participant, W3C eGov IG
> Membership Director, FIRM Board
> Former Project Manager, ET.gov
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
> ]
> On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 12:10 PM
> To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
> Subject: canceling 17 Sept. call; next one on 1 Oct.
>
>
> Dear Group,
>
> Given the number of regrets we got so far, including both of your
> Chairs, we are sorry to announce the cancelation of the call scheduled
> for next Wednesday, 17 Sept.
> Next Group call should take place on 1 October.
>
> We haven't heard many comments yet about the Group Outline and
> Activity Plan we proposed a few days ago, and expect you to comment
> about them in the mailing list.
>
> We also request again topics for the Agenda that is evolving as usual
> at [1] or for the F2F meeting that will take place 23-24 October. I've
> just started a wiki page at [2]. If you are planning to attend, please
> register at [3].
>
> Best,
> Jose.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Next_Meeting
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2008
>
>
> --
> Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>    W3C/CTIC
> eGovernment Lead                  http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 19 September 2008 17:00:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 19 September 2008 17:01:00 GMT