Re: FYI: What makes a standard ‘world class’?

On Aug 14, 2021, at 08:43 AM, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:
> 
> Quoting…
>  
>> What makes a standard ‘world class’?
>>  
>> It is not easy to say exactly what makes one standard better than another, but the following points are probably the most important:
>> A world class standard should have well-defined objectives that respond to real needs in a timely manner.
>> Its technical content should be complete and accurate.
>> It should be easy to understand (or as easy as the subject matter allows!) and easy to implement.
>> Its requirements should be expressed clearly and unambiguously.
>> It should be validated.
>> It should be well-maintained.
>  
> Reference: https://www.etsi.org/images/files/Brochures/AGuideToWritingWorldClassStandards.pdf <https://www.etsi.org/images/files/Brochures/AGuideToWritingWorldClassStandards.pdf>
>  
> I recommend that these 6 points be used as “exit criteria” for all W3C specifications/standards efforts.  For example, I don’t believe we have met this bar with the VC Data Model 1.0 specification (https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/480#issuecomment-898876288 <https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/480#issuecomment-898876288>).


Michael --

Without digging into whether these criteria should be or were
applicable for the VC Data Model 1.0 Technical Recommendation,
it is not appropriate for you to raise this suggestion (that 
they should be adopted as exit criteria for *all* W3C 
specifications/standards efforts) within any CG, WG, or other
group *within* W3, *except* the Process Community Group --

   https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/

Please direct further discussion of the above there.

As to the VC Data Model 1.0 TR, it went through full review 
two years ago.  That would have been the time for you to 
raise what I'm reading as an attempt at a formal objection.

In any case, the Credentials CG is not empowered to perform
substantial revision to that TR; the CCG is only empowered 
to "maintain" the TR, which basically amounts to fixing 
typos and similar-grade errors and bugs.  

For a full rewrite of the scale I think you're suggesting, 
you'll need a new VC WG charter, which would typically be 
written by some of the W3 members who expect to participate 
in the proposed WG, and then ratified by the W3 Advisory 
Committee, etc.  

Your efforts, as I read your recent posts including but not 
limited to the above, would be distinct from the current 
efforts to charter a VC WG which is meant to produce a 
VC DM 1.1 TR, as your desired rewrite would almost certainly 
produce a VC DM 2.0, due to the breaking changes I anticipate 
you'll produce vs VC DM 1.0.

Thanks,

Ted





--
A: Yes.                          http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html
| Q: Are you sure?           
| | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
| | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
Senior Support & Evangelism  //        mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
                             //              http://twitter.com/TallTed
OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http://www.openlinksw.com/
         20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803
     Weblog    -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/
     Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/
     LinkedIn  -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/
     Twitter   -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink
     Facebook  -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware
Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers