Withdrawing CfC ->Re: CfC for closing the NFC WG and relicensing (copyright) the 2 alternative versions of the spec to move to Community Groups

We're withdrawing the CfC.  There was a concern expressed privately from 
one participant about closing the WG.  We shouldn't have included 
anything about closing the WG in the CfC (my fault).  It's going to 
close anyway - the charter expired, no hope for 2 implementations, no 
participation from the members who would need to implement to make it 
successful (and in that state since 2012), really part of sysapps and 
that hasn't produced security/permission/runtime specs.

What motivated this CfC is: "If the Director closes a Working Group 
<http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#GeneralTermination> W3C /must 
/ publish any unfinished specifications on the Recommendation track as 
Working Group Notes <http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#Note>. " [1]

The current Recommendation track TR published by the WG[2] is the old 
spec that was worked on from the start of the WG until 20 October 2014 
(and the Charter expired a week later).  The published TR doesn't 
reflect the last version of that which can be found at [3].  When this 
WG closes and the WG Note is published, the contents should come from 
[3], not [2].  Instead of the CfC, we could have just made that clear(my 
fault too).

Our CfC also requested relicensing now for the old spec.  That should 
wait until someone actually wants to do something with it. (We don't).   
So, what's needed there is to make sure the WG Note contains the last 
version of the TR approach (the state of the draft when the WG Charter 
expired[3]).

Intel proposed a different approach after the WG Charter expired. We 
hope to put that in a Community Group and don't need anything from the 
WG to do that.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#tr-end
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/nfc/
[3] http://w3c.github.io/nfc/proposals/common/nfc.html (Note: the date 
for this should be 20 October 2014 -- see GitHub)
[4] http://www.w3.org/2012/nfc/#roadmap


On 2015-02-24 05:15, Bourhis, Jacques wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
>
> The NFC WG charter [3] expired 1 November 2014.  Work on the spec 
> under the previous charter was from Intel and Don Coleman[4].  The WG 
> had only a single implementation so no chance to complete a W3C spec 
> (which would require 2 independent implementations).  Given that 
> state, it seemed unlikely that re-chartering could, or should, be 
> approved.
>
> The WG approach was changed with a proposed new draft [2] and a 
> proposed new WG charter[1].  That was an attempt to attract broader 
> participation, to enable an API that would work in Web Browsers and to 
> attract a second independent implementer. That has been successful in 
> gaining new interest, but not in participating in the WG.   It appears 
> that moving the Web NFC API editor's draft to a Community Group may be 
> more successful. The goal of a Community Group would be to continue to 
> work on the Web API draft version, get participation from Browser 
> vendors and make it clear there is enough implementation interest, and 
> then move it back to a W3C WG, preferably a large W3C WG rather than a 
> single purpose WG like the current one.
>
> If this CfC is approved, the WG would ask the Director to close the 
> NFC WG.  The Director would be asked to license a WG Note containing 
> the current TR [4] under a copyright license that allowed it to be 
> taken up by a Community Group or elsewhere (that is legacy, dropped by 
> the WG already, but some are interested in continuing it for a low 
> level API).  The newer Editor's draft [2] for a Web API is recent and 
> was written by Intel.  In order to have both old and new approaches 
> relicensed by W3C[[6], it seems likely the new draft would need 
> publication as a FPWD which doesn't make much sense with the WG 
> closing.  However, Intel could contribute the Intel contents of it 
> (almost everything) to a CG and the (few) other recent contributors 
> could be asked to repeat their contribution in the CG.  If that proves 
> not to be possible, this CfC also asks the Director to relicense the 
> new draft so that it could be moved to a CG as well.  The Community 
> Group planned to take up that draft would use the CG template for its 
> charter[6] and would be based on the charter the WG has been 
> developing[1].
>
> If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply to 
> this e-mail by 3 March 2015 at the latest. Positive response is 
> preferred and encouraged, and silence will be considered as agreement 
> with the proposal.
>
> [1] http://w3c.github.io/nfc/charter/index.html
> [2] http://w3c.github.io/nfc/
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/09/nfc-wg-charter.html
> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/nfc/
> [5] https://www.w3.org/community/council/wiki/Templates/CG_Charter
> [6] http://www.w3.org/2014/12/relicense.html
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacques.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Corporation SAS (French simplified joint stock company)
> Registered headquarters: "Les Montalets"- 2, rue de Paris,
> 92196 Meudon Cedex, France
> Registration Number:  302 456 199 R.C.S. NANTERRE
> Capital: 4,572,000 Euros
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>