W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-socialweb@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Doodle poll on IG vs. XG

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:22:34 +0000
Message-ID: <b3be92a01001200822i5cff7633x34eaaf3d8e54506c@mail.gmail.com>
To: cperey@perey.com
Cc: public-xg-socialweb@w3.org
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com> wrote:
> Hi Harry,
>
> Your Doodle asks if the group should ask the W3C for extension as an XG or
> change to IG. Is there not a third scenario in which the report of the SWXG
> gets finished (at least in draft) in the next 60 days?
>

We will still produce an interim report in 60 days of course.

>
> Ten months ago I found it difficult to envision how we would use an entire
> year to complete the charter of the XG...
>

I am not surprised. About 2/3 of XGs ask for charter extensions.

>
> I fear that if the XG were to become directly an IG, it might not *ever*
> fulfill its charter and a lot of effort would be lost.
>

Exactly.

>
> On the other hand, if  we take more and more time before producing a report,
> and with the world of social Web moving forward, not standing still, how do
> we know that the information gathered last July is still accurate? relevant?
> valid?
>

Explain what parts are no longer accurate/relevant?

>
> Don't you/we run the risk, with an extension, of the XG being totally
> irrelevant (we may be anyway!)?
>

Well, we do have Jeff Panzer from Google on the next call over the
Salmon Protocol, which I think will be great, it's important work the
W3C should be aware of.

>
> I am unable to commit more of my time to the SWXG report/document (since I
> am up against another deadline right now), we all know how deadlines can be
> very valuable for increasing focus and productivity.
>
>

No problem, you've done lots of work with the Framework doc already,
and some combo of that with ID Commons Lexicon will be crucial.

> What are the chances that by asking for an extension of the SWXG, the group
> and its editor(s) are just pushing the inevitable "pain" out to spring 2010?
>

Well, most people (including myself) have a bit more time in summer
than we do in the spring. I am fully confident a final report can be
done that adequately addresses the landscape, but we have still not
really engaged large portions of the landscape and crucial
technologies - that's what worries me more than anything else.  That
just requires more time.

>
> --
> Christine
>
> Spime Wrangler
>
> cperey@perey.com
> mobile +41 79 436 68 69
> VoIP (from US) +1 (617) 848-8159
> Skype (from anywhere) Christine_Perey
>
>
> Harry Halpin wrote:
>>
>> To take a quick straw poll, here is the Doodle poll for IG vs. XG:
>>
>> http://www.doodle.com/g6wgh3dsydquivnh
>>
>> Basically, if we extend the XG, then we have more time to figure out
>> future standardization and write the final report.
>>
>> If we go the route of the IG, then we can use the list-serv and even
>> meet indefinitely, but we don't really have a purpose per se.
>>
>> My preference is to stick with the XG for the time being before
>> transitioning into an IG, as I think we have yet to overview the full
>> landscape and talk to enough people to give the W3C an accurate
>> overview and gameplan that respects and integrates well into the rest
>> of the Social Web eco-system. Plus, I only like participating in
>> activities that have definite goal. Once we are done with the final
>> report, I'm happy to turn into a IG-driven listserv though if that's
>> the best way forward, or maybe an IG plus some WGs (Working Groups).
>> For differences, see here [2].
>>
>>
>> [1]http://www.doodle.com/g6wgh3dsydquivnh
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups
>>        cheers,
>>             harry
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2010 16:23:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:08 UTC