Re: Emerging WPIG face-to-face agenda

> On Feb 2, 2016, at 3:49 AM, VIGNET cyril <Cyril.VIGNET@bpce.fr> wrote:
> 
> Hello Ian,
> 
> As an introduction of the WPIG, could it be possible to have a clear understanding of the governance of the works : WPIG, WPWG and WP communities. I must admit that I am a bit lost on relationship with communities.

Hi Cyril,

Here’s a first pass description:

 * The Web Payments Interest Group is a discussion forum where we are principally trying to understand the market and
   identify standardization opportunities for W3C. The IG also plays other roles but more lightly, such as outreach to other
   communities and (in the future) reviews of the work of other groups. The IG does not produce technical specifications.
   It does, however, publish documents that reflect its efforts such as use cases, or a vision document.

   That is why the IG’s FTF agenda will mostly include items to help us understand where there are new opportunities and
   what W3C’s priorities should be. So we ask questions like:

      - What will be the impact on the Web of PSD2? Faster payments initiatives? blockchain? etc.
      - How does the Web need to evolve to meet those needs?
      - Are the right people at the table to succeed in a standardization effort?
      - Does the work play well in the larger ecosystem?

 * The Web Payments Working Group is chartered to produce W3C Recommendations for payment APIs. Only Working
   Groups produce W3C Recommendations. Working Groups take input from a variety of sources, including:

     - They can write materials from scratch
     - They can take up Submissions from W3C Members [1]
     - They can take up Community Group reports

   The W3C rec track process [0] is about turning that input into W3C recommendations that reflect practical interoperability.

   In the case of WPWG, the expectation is that the group will take as input specifications being developed in the Web
   Payments Community Group and/or the Web Incubator Community Group.

 * The Web Payments Community Group is a community-driven activity doing pre-standardization work. Community
   Groups operate under a different (lightweight) process [2] than Working Groups. however, the patent policy associated
   with Community Group specifications is designed to fit well with the patent policy for Working Groups, so that when
   a Working Group does take up a CG specification, there are Royalty-Free commitments that come along with it.
   The commitments are not as substantial as the commitments of a Working Group, which is one benefit (for the Web)
   of work moving to a Working Group.

Let me know whether that helps, Cyril. I’m happy to take another pass if you think it would be useful.

Ian


[0] https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#Reports
[1] https://www.w3.org/Submission/
[2] https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/
--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447