Re: New draft WG charter

Hi, Thierry–

I think you were reading the already-revised version of the charter, 
which reflected the conversation from the telcon.

A couple of comments inline...

On 5/31/12 3:11 AM, Thierry MICHEL wrote:
>
>
> Le 30/05/2012 23:25, olivier Thereaux a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> As we were beginning our teleconference call today, Doug shared a
>> first pass at our new draft charter:
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/audio/charter/2012/charter-proposed.html
>>
>> Please have a read and comment/suggest in the next few days.
>>
>> A few things we noted on the call:
>>
>> * It is no longer necessary to mention the incubator (since we are
>> re-chartering the existing WG)
>> * The scope section should mention the goals of the MIDI work
>> * The deliverables list should include the use cases and requirements doc
>
> It already mentions it as other non-normative documents, in section 2.1
>
> It currently lists "Test suites for each specification", but it should
> also say "implementation report".

Added.


>> * The expected milestones for the web audio API should be, per our
>> latest discussions:
>> FPWD: Dec 2011
>> LC: Q4 2012
>> CR: Q2 2013
>> PR: Q4 2013
>> REC: Q4 2013
>
> The expected milestones for the MIDI Device Communication API should
> also be extended.

I don't think so... Olivier, please correct me if those are wrong, too.


> The following Note mentions "initial schedule", but we should also
> mentions deliverable changes (this is why we are indeed requesting a
> charter renewal).
>
> "Note: The group will document significant changes from this initial
> schedule on the group home page. "
>
> I would say:
>
> Note: The group will document significant changes from its initial
> charter [ adding here a link to the initial charter] on the group home
> page.

I added a link to the wiki, and to the initial charter elsewhere, but 
didn't use this precise wording.


>> (which I guess changes the end date of the new charter?)
>
> Right. plus we need to include 6 months after Rec.

I think current end date is roughly accurate; we'll revise it after we 
know more from the review.

Regards-
-Doug

Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 00:31:32 UTC