W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vision-newstd@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Update on new standards proposal

From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:43:25 -0700
To: public-vision-newstd@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF854FFC5.6E009C2D-ON882577BC.007C0B57-882577BC.007CCAA2@us.ibm.com>
Hello Ian,

I'm glad the general idea was approved but I'm not sure I understand what 
is going to be offered to facilitate the creation and work of Community 
Group if no infrastructure is provided. I must be missing something 
because practically speaking how would these groups then come to life and 

Arnaud  Le Hors - Program Director, Global Open Standards, IBM Open Source 
& Standards Policy

From:   Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
To:     public-vision-newstd@w3.org
Date:   10/14/2010 03:28 PM
Subject:        Update on new standards proposal
Sent by:        public-vision-newstd-request@w3.org

Hello all,

I come bearing pretty good news!

Here's an update on the new standards task force proposal [1] 
following W3C's annual management meeting. The purpose of that meeting 
was to prioritize and select from among the many proposals produced by 
all five of the task forces created by the CEO (including this one). 
Here are the results. I welcome your comments, questions, etc.

  _ Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/community

On the proposal

This proposal is *approved* ... in part. Congratulations to the task 
force for a job well done. This is likely to have a big positive 
effect on W3C.

Pending discussion with the Advisory Committee the first week of 
November, W3C will fund part of it and W3C will start to implement it. 
That's going to mean:

   - Hammering out the details of the proposal, probably with some 
process document edits
   - Same with the IPR policy: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/newstdipr.html

The parts that will *not* be funded with funds available today are:

     - Infrastructure

     - Developer portal

People liked these proposals a lot, but they liked others (of the 100 
or so we started with) even more.

I am likely to begin seeking additional funding for at least one of 
these, because I think they are important to the success of the 
program overall. Let me know if you'd like to talk more about that.

On revenue ideas

I have also been discussing the relationship between this proposal and 
a related, revenue-bearing proposal for something we are calling 
"business groups." The idea is this:

    - If you want to create a group rapidly and need very little W3C 
staff involvement, a community group is the way to go.
    - If you want extra benefits but no ongoing staff contact, then 
Members can create a business group and non-Members can participate 
for a fee that is a fraction of the regular W3C Membership dues. The 
extra benefits (in the draft proposal) include some periodic 
consulting from the W3C staff, and the opportunity to work in a forum 
that is publicly readable but not writable.
    - If you want significant staff resource investment, then W3C 
expects large organizations to support W3C through Membership dues, 
whether their work will be on the standards track (Working Group) or 
not (Interest Group).

Thus, there will be some new options for participation (for new 
audiences) with different price tags and sets of benefits. We are 
still working those out but I wanted to let you know where we stand.
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 22:44:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:44:40 UTC