W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > May 2009

Re: charter and publication wrt W3C Process

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 13:13:56 +0200
Cc: eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Daniel Bennett <daniel@citizencontact.com>, Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>
Message-Id: <12FE39E5-3822-4785-97F2-BF637C9E31A7@w3.org>
To: washingtona@acm.org
El 23/05/2009, a las 0:59, Anne Washington escribió:
> Are we making standards or recommending standards or suggesting ways  
> to implement standards? What is our product? Daniel, Adam, Sharron,  
> and Owen bring up some interesting points.

Yup, that's the question plus who are the stakeholders.

> Making a W3C standard is an arduous process and outside the scope of  
> an W3C IG Interest Group.
> By recommending standards, I mean suggesting which existing  
> standards would best fit a particular situation. A formal W3C  
> recommendation is only within scope for a W3C WG(Working Group)  
> which is possible to charter, if I understood correctly.

Yes, we can decide to propose W3C re-charter us as WG. I would like to  
highlight that most of the mechanisms we have used already, even  
opening our draft note for comments, are the ones used by WGs, so WG  
work would not differ much from work as we know it although we would  
need to follow a few procedures more.

>  We not only say what standards are out there, but provide the  
> recipe for combining the standards into a palatable dish.

Yes! and also try to fill gaps (if we decide and are able to) or  
delegate to others that could do.

> Jose's example of the Mobile Web Best Practices is technically a  
> "W3C recommendation" and a best practices document. Its specificity  
> is its beauty. If we created a recommendation like that, we'd have  
> to narrow down to a very particular topic: such as "Citation Best  
> Practices" or "Data Discovery Best Practices".
> The third possibility is suggesting ways to implement standards. It  
> would be more of an if-then rubric for multiple situations. This is  
> the challenge with egovernment. There are a variety of  
> organizational, technical and client possibilities. Our howto  
> suggestions would need apply to many possible topics and situations.
> I am hoping that the next product(s) could go both broad and deep.  
> We need a few focused best practice documents (i.e. recommendation)  
> as well as something more broad to address the larger egovernment  
> audiences.

Rewritten or v2.0 of the note could be the broad product while those  
BPs could be the smaller docs. I think we need a few very focused  
areas for those as you mention above, with enough interest for  
stakeholders to use hem and for group members to produce them.

-- Jose

> Anne Washington
> On Wed, 20 May 2009, Daniel Bennett wrote:
>> I was thinking that having best practices and having use cases was  
>> the most obvious things to do. I think that the "small how-to"  
>> project of identifying and exposing OGD is actually a huge, but  
>> important project that I encompasses citations and indexing  
>> documents (hmmm perhaps schematizing repositories). Citations would  
>> be a big win that could help transform access and referencing govt.  
>> documents.
>> Another not-so-small project is to allow for a posting of what  
>> various governments are using and the standards they are using or  
>> breaking. Legislatures, executive and judicial organizations across  
>> the world use different authoring tools that often determine what  
>> is published online and how, the success in using standards or  
>> being accessible, how the governmental entities index/make  
>> searchable/usable the online documents and services, are all datum  
>> that we could help be collected. We don't need to even comment on  
>> the data collected, just make it reference-able for conversation.  
>> And this would help governments find out what software is  
>> available, especially if the software was developed internally and  
>> could be made available. In the United States alone there are  
>> thousands of governments (federal, state, municipal) using  
>> different standards and tools with different results, but no place  
>> to post and/or search for what they are all doing.
>> Daniel
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 11:14:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:43:09 UTC