Re: transitions to Working Group'

Can we take unitl like May 1, 2014 to try to finalize a transition? If by May 1 next we do not all feel comfortable about this we can do a poll and take a consensus based decision.

regards


 
Milton Ponson
GSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

On Sunday, April 20, 2014 3:02 AM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Greetings SWISIG members


Yesterday I filled out a form to W3C  more or less saying we are not
ready yet to transition to WG, (I reply quickly sometimes not to forget)

Only after hitting the send button
it occurred to me I should have consulted with co-chair and group members

We can change our response til 10 May, so if enough ppl think
we should transition this year, please stepfforward and
state your commitment to make things happen, and we'll resubmit

Otherwise, let's see if plans mature in their own time

Thanks, happy Spring Holidays to all

PDM



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paola Di Maio via WBS Mailer <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:45 AM
Subject: [wbs] response to 'Determining which Community and Business Groups transitions to Working Group'
To: paola.dimaio@gmail.com, team-community-process@w3.org


The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Determining which
Community and Business Groups transitions to Working Group' (public) for
Paola Di Maio.

>
> ---------------------------------
> Your Community Group or Business Group
> ----
> Please, name the Community Group or Business Group for which you are
> submitting answers.
>
>
Name of your Community Group or Business Group: SEMANTIC WEB INTERFACES
(SWI) SIG

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> State of your Community Group or Business Group
> ----
> Is your Community Group or Business Group:
>
>

 * ( ) Active and ongoing and nearing completion
 * ( ) Inactive because it has completed its work
 * (x) Active and ongoing and far from completion
 * ( ) Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because
the CG never got momentum

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Goal of your Community Group or Business Group
> ----
> Is the goal of your Community Group or Business Group:
>
>

 * (x) To provide a specification
 * ( ) To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
 * ( ) Other (please specify)
You checked "other", please specify:
a high level specificationn

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group
> ----
> What are your specification transition plans?
>

 * ( ) We have already handed off all or part of a specification to a
Working Group.

 * ( ) We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working
Group within six months.

 * ( ) We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a
Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
 * (x) We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group
(provide details in the next question).

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> No transition to a Working Group
> ----
> We do not expect to transition to a Working Group for the following
> reasons (check all that apply):
>
>

 * [x] Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
 * [ ] Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform.
 * [ ] A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups
have too much bureaucracy.
 * [ ] We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group
patent commitments.
 * [ ] Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to
follow the work into a Working Group.
 * [ ] Other (please specify).
You checked "other", please specify:
exploratory work,  community is  still loosely engaged so far
maybe if one or two ears if things mature

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Open comments
> ----
> Please, let us us know of anything you feel is relevant to complete your
> answers.
>
>
Comments:


>
> These answers were last modified on 19 April 2014 at 02:14:48 U.T.C.
> by Paola Di Maio
>
Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed  until 2014-05-11.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer