Re: More feedback on the DXWG re-charter

Simon

Re:

#1, you're quite right, I'll edit to include

#2, l was suggesting that we need a fresh, updated UCR doc to isolate the
things we're working on. Clearly from the ways that the group has been
working over the last 2-3 years this will look more like a product backlog
with milestone snapshots, but we need to have (esp for the wide review)
contextualising use cases and distilled requirements in some form that
allows the CR & PR process to work (with the expectation/hope of wide
community review).  I'm seeking W3C view on this, but as the WG doesn't
have easy access to a single "product owner" then we cannot imo move fully
into that agile delivery model.  But, this is just my opinion.

#3: I guess this follows from my reply above and all I can suggest is that
we can be explicit about the my step and perhaps add something about
aspirations if we can shorten development cycles in line with W3C
operational expectations to manage in the time we have other releases. I.e,
there's a huge difference between rapid publication cycles of a working
draft and getting that into play with full participation beyond the WG to
include the wide community review not only of other WG & CG  but also
others less well connected with the W3C. We need to be very wary of this
turning into a small self-serving group that only listens to itself.

Hope this helps. I've asked PLH for the W3C view on the path to evergreen
... let's keep this discussion going to get some clarity for all on the
options and approaches available to us whilst at the same time keeping a
keen eye on the clock to ensure that we don't inadvertently miss the
upcoming deadlines.

Peter


On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, 23:42 Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton), <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
wrote:

> Concerning the DCAT activity:
>
>
>
>    1. I would expect to see 'GitHub issue backlog' as one of the inputs
>    to the DCAT work
>    2. I don’t think we intend to generate a new UCR _*document*_ (though
>    new use-cases will be accepted at any time
>    3. I'm also a bit uncomfortable seeing 'DCAT3' listed explicitly – if
>    we expect this to be leading into an evergreen standard it should be DCAT4,
>    DCAT5, DCAT6 ...) – could it be reworded to indicate this?
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *Simon J D Cox *
>
> Research Scientist - Environmental Informatics
> <https://research.csiro.au/ei>
>
> Team Leader – Environmental Information Infrastructure
>
> CSIRO Land and Water <http://www.csiro.au/Research/LWF>
>
>
>
> *E* simon.cox@csiro.au *T* +61 3 9545 2365 *M* +61 403 302 672
>
>    *Mail:* Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169
>
> *   Visit: *Central Reception, Research Way, Clayton, Vic 3168
> ///honey.zebra.chip <https://w3w.co/honey.zebra.chip>
>
> *   Deliver: *Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168
>
> people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox
>
> orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420
>
> github.com/dr-shorthair
>
> Twitter @dr_shorthair <https://twitter.com/dr_shorthair>
>
> https://xkcd.com/1810/
>
> CSIRO acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the land, sea and waters, of
> the area that we live and work on across Australia. We acknowledge their
> continuing connection to their culture and we pay our respects to their
> Elders past and present.
>
> The information contained in this email may be confidential or privileged.
> Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this
> email in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender by
> return email. Thank you. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not
> represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this
> communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of
> errors, virus, interception or interference.
>
> CSIRO Australia’s National Science Agency  |  csiro.au
> <https://www.csiro.au/>
>
>
>