Re: [POLL] WebCGM Charter Extension Request

Yes.

-Lofton.


At 11:03 AM 5/27/2007 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:


>WebCGM WG,
>
>Please respond TO LIST -- archived answer is essential.
>
>Please respond as soon as possible, but no later than Tuesday, 5/29.
>
>QUESTION:  Do you agree that the WebCGM WG should submit the following 
>Charter extension request?  Yes or no?  (If "no", then provide the reasons 
>for your negative vote).
>
>If this poll repeats our informal unanimous "yes" position from earlier 
>telecons and email, then I will circulate a results summary, edit the 
>paragraph starting "A resolution to request a charter extension..." and 
>the reference [8], and send the request to Chris and Steve.
>
>Thanks,
>-Lofton.
>
>==== proposed extension request follows =====
>
>Dear Steve and Chris,
>
>The WebCGM Working Group requests a 6 month extension to its
>charter in order to finalize uncompleted tasks from its current charter.
>The WebCGM WG Charter is currently terminating on 31 May 2007 [1].
>
>The WebCGM Working Group has fulfilled most of its Mission and Scope [2] 
>successfully, providing chartered deliverables [2b] with publication of a 
>WebCGM 2.0 Recommendation [3] and an OASIS Standard [4],  an 
>Interoperability Implementation Report [5], a Test Suite [6] and 
>addressing a few WebCGM 2.0 Recommendation Errata [7].
>
>The WebCGM Working has not had time yet to finalize the following 
>deliverables as mentioned in its charter[2b]:
>
>1- collecting and publishing pending WebCGM 1.0 errata
>2- publication of a WebCGM 1.0 third release
>3- collecting and publishing WebCGM 2.0 errata, if required
>4- Organize a F2F to finalize these items.
>
>Furthermore WebCGM experts have compiled a preliminary list of 
>functionalities which were arguably within the scope of the WebCGM 2.0 
>Rec, but were not addressed for timing reasons -- they arose too late in 
>the process. Some new features that might be potentially desirable for a 
>future WebCGM 2.x version are also under discussion.
>
>During its extension period, the WG will monitor these external 
>developments, and will decide before the end of the extension period 
>whether there is justification and requirement to re-charter the WG with 
>appropriate scope, to encompass the new work.
>
>A resolution to request a charter extension was accepted by the WebCGM WG 
>at during its telecon [8]. All WG members in good standing have indicated 
>they support this charter extension  and will continue to support the work 
>of the WebCGM WG.
>
>If you should decide to approve this request, then, at your discretion,
>you may consider granting more than 6 months (e.g., up through end of
>this calendar year).
>
>
>On behalf of Lofton Henderson, Chair of the WebCGM WG,
>
>Regards,
>Thierry Michel.
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#duration
>[2] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#mission
>[2b] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#deliverables
>[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-webcgm20-20070130/
>[4] http://docs.oasis-open.org/webcgm/v2.0/OS/webcgm-v2.0-index.html
>[5]http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/implementation-report.html
>[6]http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/testsuite.html
>[7]http://www.w3.org/2006/WebCGM20-errata.html
>
>[8]  to paste URI
>
>
>--------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 13:44:28 UTC