Re: New, Unified XG Proposal

I fully agree,

I think we may start with as  simple as possible and see how it  
develops.

Joaquín  Salvachúa

El 10/02/2009, a las 15:02, Miquel Martin escribió:

>
> Hi all,
> I've been sitting back a bit while this debate unfolds. I guess I  
> have a
> very practical approach: there's enough momentum and
> relevant/enthusiastic people to make some good work, and the
> organizational specifics are a minor point (I know, I know, let me be
> idealistic ;)
>
> Here's my 2 cents:
>
> - The task forces in the charter sound great. If they end up being  
> task
> forces, then they definitely need separate phone conferences
>
> - It sounds like the single XG approach would reduce the  
> bureaucracy and
> increase the efficiency. Less red tape => more work done
>
> - If we stick to one XG, we'll need task synchronization meetings, but
> on a much lower frequency than task meet ups
>
> That said, my main interest lies in the Distributed Architecures and
> Contextual Data task forces. I'm still clearing up participation  
> issues
> back at the office, but I expect to be able to contribute to both.
>
> Let the debate continue ;) But please, the sooner we start the more
> momentum we'll still have
>
> Miquel Martin
>
> Christine Perey wrote:
>> Hi Krishna,
>>
>> Thank you for your proposal to work on the project and your  
>> suggestion of a
>> phased approach.
>>
>> I feel (as I believe you expressed) that focusing in the near term  
>> need not
>> ignore/exclude the potential future areas of study.
>>
>> You wrote:
>> c)	Most probably it will be a little rough and anemic  
>> participation in
>> the beginning - but if we, as founding members, contribute enough to
>> generate a critical mass, then I am sure the TFs will gather  
>> momentum.
>>
>> I'm entirely of this opinion (and in my experience it works if/ 
>> when the
>> founding team is dedicated and their work is good) but, out of  
>> respect for
>> those who have more experience in this (W3C) structure than I, I  
>> get the
>> feeling that this is counter to standard W3C process.
>>
>> Christine
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of  
>> Krishna Sankar
>> (ksankar)
>> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 9:07 PM
>> To: Karl Dubost; Fabien Gandon
>> Cc: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: New, Unified XG Proposal
>>
>>
>> Agreed. We can look at a document-centric approach to focus the  
>> discussions
>> as well as pragmatic deliverables.
>>
>> Would be happy to edit/co-edit work in Privacy and Trust TF and  
>> (possibly)
>> contribute to the architecture TF. Don't know if it is the right  
>> protocol
>> (i.e. add directly to the wiki), but I have added my names to the  
>> docs I
>> would be interested in. Am open to changes as we get more commitment.
>>
>> Some quick points:
>>
>> a)	We might not need to work on all documents simultaneously -  
>> quality
>> before quantity.
>> b)	I think, one use case and one best practices document, per TF,  
>> might
>> be sustainable than the current 4 docs. I assume there is some  
>> logic behind
>> the distribution
>> c)	Most probably it will be a little rough and anemic  
>> participation in
>> the beginning - but if we, as founding members, contribute enough to
>> generate a critical mass, then I am sure the TFs will gather  
>> momentum.
>>
>> Cheers
>> <k/>
>>
>> |-----Original Message-----
>> |From: public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org [mailto:public-social- 
>> web-
>> |talk-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Karl Dubost
>> |Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 11:38 AM
>> |To: Fabien Gandon
>> |Cc: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
>> |Subject: Re: New, Unified XG Proposal
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |Le 8 févr. 2009 à 13:52, Fabien Gandon a écrit :
>> |> My opinion is that there is material here for several XG having  
>> their
>> |> own telecons. Now if we were to go for one XG with several TFs I
>> |> would very strongly recommend having one cycle of telecons per TF
>> |> i.e. each TF should have at least its own monthly telecon.
>> |
>> |There is maybe another way to start this. Being very practical.
>> |The [description][1] for each task force have empty boxes for
>> |deliverables.
>> |
>> |1. Let's have quantifiable deliverables.
>> |2. Align at least two editors for each deliverables. (one  
>> writing, one
>> |reviewing)
>> |3. An editor can edit one and only deliverable. (to avoid the  
>> workload
>> |delaying others) 4. The editor will spend half a day to one full  
>> day a
>> |week on that work.
>> |
>> |Volunteers for which documents?
>> |
>> |
>> |Rationale: if we have plenty of editors and people that will be
>> |workable, if people are midly able to commit to this, we will  
>> have nice
>> |discussions but we will not achieve a lot.
>> |
>> |
>> |[1]: http://esw.w3.org/topic/UnifiedSocialXG
>> |
>> |
>> |--
>> |Karl Dubost
>> |Montréal, QC, Canada
>> |http://twitter.com/karlpro
>> |
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Miquel Martin
> Research Staff
> NEC Europe Ltd.
> NEC Laboratories Europe
> Kurfuerstenanlage 36
> 69115 Heidelberg
> Germany
>
> Phone:  +49-6221-4342 116
> Fax:    +49-6221-4343 155
>
> NEW E-MAIL:
> e-mail: miquel.martin@nw.neclab.eu
>
> NEC Europe Ltd.
> Registered Office: NEC House
> 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL
> Registered in England 2832014
>
>






------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joaquin Salvachua               tel: +34 91 549 57 00  x.3056
Associated Professor                 +34 91 549 57 62  x.3056
dpt. Telematica                                                  
Change  ^
E.T.S.I. Telecomunicacion
Ciudad Universitaria S/N         fax: +34 91 336 73 33
E-28040  MADRID   SPAIN

mailto:jsalvachua@dit.upm.es // http://www.dit.upm.es/~jsr
Blog: http://jsalvachua.blogspot.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--