Re: HTML WG charter review, tracking feedback

Hi Dan,

The principal difficulty with your recommended approach is that it assumes 
the charter documents should be modified based solely on the out-of-band 
feedback being produced so far, not all of which necessarily has consensus 
of the W3C members who are using the review process as their means of 
communicating feedback.

I believe it would be better to consider all of the feedback together 
before concluding that significant changes to the charter are required.
For one thing, some of the feedback posted so far could also appear in the 
review feedback classified as "Accept with minor revisions" in which case 
it may not be that the changes are "significant" in the sense of requiring 
another formal review.

Also, it might be reasonable to estimate the stretch goals after last call 
in quarters and years rather than months, whereas eliminating those stages 
from the charters entirely leads to the false impression that the working 
group is not required to take the work through to proposed rec.

Regarding the rather lengthy milestone periods being suggested in some 
recent feedback, I would interpret those as just a general uneasiness 
about everyone's ability to compromise.  But if we can put personal vested 
interests on the side and focus on innovating in ways that achieve the 
essential requirement that all of us have, which is to make life better 
for content authors and processor implementers, then it should indeed be 
possible to produce *something* useful by 2009.  Basically, we have to be 
more optimistic because development by a community works all the time, and 
it can work for the W3C too.

As an example, I would encourage everyone to pay close attention to the 
demonstration Dave Raggett will give at the W3C AC meeting, which 
highlights what can be done by taking the best of Web Forms 2.0 and the 
XForms architecture together-- working on today's browsers (IE, Mozilla, 
Opera and Safari).  It really is a portent of the significant positive 
results that could be achieved in quite short order through consideration 
of multiple viewpoints, which is fortunate because I believe this 
cooperation is exactly what is called for in the currently proposed 
charter documents for the HTML and Forms working groups.

Best regards,
John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
STSM: Workplace Forms Architect and Researcher
Co-Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
IBM Victoria Software Lab
E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com  http://www.ibm.com/software/

Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer





Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> 
Sent by: w3c-html-cg-request@w3.org
11/22/2006 10:28 AM

To
Dean Jackson <dino@w3.org>
cc
Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Steve Bratt <steve@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" 
<dbaron@dbaron.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Maciej Stachowiak 
<mjs@apple.com>, Hypertext CG <w3c-html-cg@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee 
<timbl@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
Subject
Re: HTML WG charter review, tracking feedback







On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 02:59 +1100, Dean Jackson wrote:
> Hi Chris, Steve,
> 
> Maciej, Ian and David have given useful feedback on the HTML WG 
> charter. What is the process by which this feedback is considered?
> 
> Does it have to wait until it is submitted by the AC review?
> 
> If some of the feedback is accepted then it might be a significant 
> change to the charter. Does this mean an extra round of AC review is 
> required?
> 
> Or, if everyone "here" agrees, is it possible to change the charter 
> currently under review?

Good questions.

I advise that you
  - leave the charter under review stable during the review

  - maintain another draft where you integrate feedback as
    you see it. Share this other draft with whoever you see fit.

In particular, give a pointer to it when you reply
to Maciej, Ian and David. Oh... they're all copied here, I see.
And www-archive is copied. Hello, fishbowl! Whee!

Perhaps the charter under review should be tweaked just slightly,
to note the presence of the other draft with a link.


> [I'm not sure who is included in "here" - the people that have 
> replied so far? the entire list of people cc-ed?]
> 
> Dean
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E