W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-social-web-talk@w3.org > February 2009

RE: Chairing

From: Krishna Sankar (ksankar) <ksankar@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:35:18 -0800
Message-ID: <9FA16888AD1BF64ABCE6C2532CCEB98A069163A1@xmb-sjc-219.amer.cisco.com>
To: "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, "Tim Anglade" <tim.anglade@af83.com>
Cc: <public-social-web-talk@w3.org>

Couple of quick points:

a)	I have worked with W3C before - was representing Cisco since 2002 and also have participated in a few wgs. Would be glad to help wherever I can.

b)	On a different note, would be happy (cautiously) to explore a co-chair position, if needed. OTOH, would  be extremely happy to work deeply on privacy, authZ and related topics. Naturally one can pick up only one task. We have to go thru the form-norm stages and get everybody focused on a few well defined tasks.
c)	I saw on another thread about industry participation et al. As I had said earlier, one of our challenge is going to be the critical mass. But, it will come only as we start organizing and begin work on crisp deliverables - documents or code - with enough value proposition.

d)	Another approach would be to focus on 2 or 3 "hot potatoes" that industry is facing (e.g. privacy, inter-company collaboration and so forth) and provide architectures, blueprints and solutions.

e)	And don't work too much about W3C procedures and process. IMHO, while we need to be generally within the W3C framework, we do have the freedom to organize in a fashion that is congruent to the domain.


|-----Original Message-----
|From: public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org [mailto:public-social-web-
|talk-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Harry Halpin
|Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:43 PM
|To: Tim Anglade
|Cc: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
|Subject: Re: Chairing
|>> Lastly, I'm happy to help chair, but I want a co-chair. Dan Brickley,
|>> Renato Ianella, and Fabien Gandon have also said they would be up for
|>> chairing, and Christine has done a good job de-factor chairing.
|>> people should choose between chairing and editing?
|> Wait a second. Two semantic web chairs? No offense but that's a recipe
|> for disaster. This is not semantic web, take 2, guys. This is a
|> separate effort. Chairmanship should reflect the diversity of our
|> backgrounds, opinions and debates.
|OK, do we have any reps from industry who would like to chair? I do
|agree more industry would be great, and a co-chair especially so. If
|not, then we should not wait for them to join. As the OpenID foundation
|shows, if a good tech solution comes out, eventually the relevant people
|from industry will join in.
|However, at least one co-chair should be familiar with W3C Process,
|ideally by having chaired or participated in it before. The reason
|people were mentioned above is due to that, not because of any activity
|in the SemWeb area.
|> Also : composition of the group and the chair should probably reflect
|> that the W3C is part Academic and part Industry. Just my two cents.
|>> If there are not objections, I'll refactor the charter this coming
|>> weekend.
|> I object. **Strongly.**
|> My problem with your whole proposal is that it negates the diversity
|> and industry appeal this group should have. As one of the few business
|> guys posting regularly on this list, let me tell you that I doubt any
|> industrial will follow the vision you outline. Instead of closing
|> doors (by merging task forces and the like) we should try to open
|> them. Again, I understand your idea of doing stuff with what we have
|> now. But since we don't need editors attached everywhere, I strongly
|> feel we should keep an open mind to let the people who we are missing
|> right now join in later.
|>> We can also make another Doodle talking about who would want to
|>> join which of the consolidated task-forces, edit which documents, and
|>> chair.
|> That seems like a fair step - If we don't make some Task Forces
|> disappear before submitting them to a vote.
|>> I'd like to see the charter go to AC membership for voting fairly
|>> shortly, say be Feb 23rd.
|> That I agree with. Let's move fast but not skip steps in our debate.
|>>       thanks,
|>>          harry
|>> [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/UnifiedSocialXG
|>> [2] http://www.doodle.com/4zdqm65sa8qmey8w
|> Cheers,
|> Tim
|> - - - - - - -
|> Tim Anglade | directeur, pôle « Turbulences » | af83
|> 42, boulevard de Sébastopol | 75003 Paris | France
|> 1436, Howard St | San Francisco | CA 94103 | USA
|> Tel : +33 1 42 72 33 32
|> Mob : +33 6 35 92 77 58
|> skype : tim_anglade
|> Web : www.af83.com
|> This email is:  [ ] bloggable   [ ] ask first   [X] private
Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2009 21:36:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:51:47 UTC