On contributing to the AI KR CG

Thank you for your interest in contributing to the AI KR CG! There are many
ways to help shape the agenda here.

As a starting point, please read the contribution guidelines on the wiki:
https://www.w3.org/community/aikr/wiki/How_to_Contribute_to_the_CG

See also this earlier post on welcoming contributions:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aikr/2025Nov/0085.html

*Pitching a talk*

If you want to pitch a talk that relates to the AI KR CG, that is welcome.
Please prepare a pre-recorded version so that CG participants who cannot
attend live can view the content and send feedback via the mailing list. As
the presenter, you choose when to give the live talk, but please circulate
proposed dates, invite CG participants, and make the joining link available
to those who register/express interest.  It is OK not to share the call
link publicly, to avoid spammers joining meetings *only registered
attendees can receive meeting invitations.

*General principles*

Contributions must have a degree of novelty, be justified by a use case,
fall within the scope of the CG's work, and address a problem space within
scope. All contributions are made under the W3C Community Contributor
License Agreement (CLA): https://www.w3.org/community/about/process/cla/

Ultimately, contributions should be geared towards creating new open
specifications and eventually web standards, whether in entirely new fields
or to complement existing standards where they fall short or are not freely
reusable. This is the discussion space.

*Process*

   1. Create a draft outline of what you want to contribute and share it as
   a wiki page or a post to this list. Make sure it aligns with the overall AI
   KR CG scope. Keep in mind that participant attention span is limited, so it
   s okay to send out reminders or repeat the post every now and then Just be
   mindful of participants bandwidith
   2. Keep the contribution cognitively relevant and manageable. Nobody can
   read long text to figure out whether it is of interest to them. Include a
   few bullet points at the top summarising what the contribution contains and
   why participants should read and engage with it.
   3. Make sure you address these questions: How does it relate to the AI
   KR CG? What problem does it address? What does the contribution consist of
   -- a term, a concept, a new point of view, a new dimension, a use case, an
   example, an API? The CG is not considering entire new architectures as
   contributions at this stage, so keep contributions focused.
   4. When you have a concept note ready to share, ask for feedback from
   the group. When it is reasonably formulated send to the Chair if you d like
   to submit to the CG Github repo

*Organising calls*

If you would like to hold a group call relating to a topic you want to
contribute, you must announce it via the mailing list and make the joining
link available to participants. After the call, circulate minutes
indicating when and where the meeting was held, who participated, and what
was discussed. Maintain a log of meetings to track the progress of your
contribution, and make sure you acknowledge others who may be contributing
to it.

Feel free to contact me  should you need my help with anything

Paola Di Maio, PhD
@yuqiang <yuqiang@humanjudgment.org>  I may have missed a few emails from
you as wel for example I did not receive a copy of your message below from
the inboxed
until I received it as part of an offlist message trail, then searched the
archive for it.
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aikr/2026May/0015.html

Please make sure you cc me in all correspondence you sent to the AI KR
list, because for some reason, it disappear from my inbox
It may have something to do with spam filters getting mixed signals.
Apologies for the inconvenience




On Thursday, May 14, 2026 at 11:33:43 PM EDT, yuqiang <
yuqiang@humanjudgment.org> wrote:


Hi Paola and Milton,

Thank you, Paola. I can prepare a small initial contribution for the CG
resources or the AI KR GitHub repo. I will try to prepare it by next Friday
and send it to you by email, so you can review whether it fits your
expectations and whether it is useful for the current work.

Milton, thank you as well. I agree that “drift” and “constraints” are also
important examples where terminology, evidence, and governance claims can
easily diverge.

I will keep the contribution lightweight and focus on a few concepts, such
as claim, evidence, counterexample condition, drift, and constraint. For
each concept, I will include a short definition and a simple use case.

Best regards,
Yuqiang