RE: joining a working group

Isn't that a _big_ problem from the point of IP protections?  Only
companies that have joined the group make IP commitments, so they are
the only people it is safe to take contributions from.  I'm quite happy
to accept _comments_ from anyone, and both the MMI and VBWG groups get
plenty of them, but I would only accept _contributions_ from
people/companies who have made IP commitments.  I would refuse to even
read a contribution from a browser company who wouldn't join the group.
(All the major browser vendors are already members of the W3C, so there
is no additional cost to them in joining the group.  If they refuse to
do so, it's because they don't want to make the IP commitment.)  If
there are independent developers who want to commit significant amounts
of time to the project, we can always invite them in as invited experts.
( The Chair of the MMI group is an invited expert, as are two editors of
the SCXML spec.) 

 

My point here is independent of whether we join MMI or set up a separate
group.  If the separate group isn't member confidential, we need to have
_very_ strict rules about who we accept contributions from.

 

-          Jim

 

From: Satish S [mailto:satish@google.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 8:09 AM
To: Jim Barnett
Cc: olli@pettay.fi; Arthur Barstow; public-speech-api@w3.org
Subject: Re: joining a working group

 

For web api development I prefer an open mailing list and discussion
forum where all work gets done very little if any in member confidential
area, similar to WebApps WG WHATWG, etc. This allows independent web
developers and browser vendors to freely participate and push the API
design forward.


Cheers
Satish



On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jim Barnett
<Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com> wrote:

Can you clarify what the problem is?  The MMI WG has always published
frequent working drafts, so it keeps the public informed of what it is
doing well before a work item reaches standard status.  The only things
that are private are the discussions leading up to the working draft.

Is the concern about member confidentiality based on IP issues, or what?


- Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: Olli Pettay [mailto:Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi]
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:43 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
Subject: Re: joining a working group

On 08/24/2012 04:37 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>  >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-speech-api/2012Aug/0083.htm

> l  > From: Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>  > Both the title and


> charter of the Multimodal Interaction WG group seems  > to be a
> perfect home for this effort.
>
>
> It appears to me (e.g. see [1]) the MMI WG still does all of its
> technical work in Member confidential space. As such, perhaps that
constraint would be show-stopper for some potential participants.

Indeed that would be.


-Olli



>
> -AB
>
> [1] <http://www.w3.org/2011/03/mmi-charter.html> "Proceedings are
Member-only"
>
>
>