- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 22:16:35 -0600
- To: Renato Iannella <r@iannel.la>
- Cc: public-council@w3.org
Hi Renato, > On Feb 18, 2026, at 9:26 PM, Renato Iannella <r@iannel.la> wrote: > > Some questions (from CG Chair that lives in a disadvantaged timezone :-) > > 1) The "Relative maturity of the technology” progress bar does not seem like there is a transparent “algorithm” driving it. > I assume this has been successfully used in WGs/IGs and works well ? This is experimental for CGs. We describe it in the lifecycle document: https://github.com/w3c/cg-program/blob/main/proposals/spec-lifecycle.md#progress-bar > > 2) I can’t see any real visual difference between a “living spec” and a “snapshot spec”. They are both called "Draft Community Group Report”. They are both drafts. One will change in place (living); one will be frozen (e.g., for IPR reasons). > > 3) I think “unmaintained” gives the wrong impression… It seems to mean that CG no longer cares about it… I think that in general it will mean there is no CG to care about it. > I suggest alternatives such as “archived” or “retired”. > > > Also, as a general comment… it seems like CGs are reflecting more and more the typical W3C processes (spec maturity, chair elections…) > There could be a sign there… What does it signify to you? Ian > > Cheers…Renato > > >> On 19 Feb 2026, at 05:54, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Minutes from our call today: >> https://www.w3.org/2026/02/18-cg-program-minutes.html >> >> Seva presented on the new User Journey Graph (UJG) CG. Sarven >> shared information about the Solid CG has run two Chair elections. >> I presented some updates on the CG Spec lifecycle, revisions to the >> specification styles, and an overview of the upcoming beta for those >> new styles. >> >> I will schedule the next call soon. Thank you, >> > -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 917 450 8783
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2026 04:16:46 UTC