W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > July 2019

RE: Rechartering the SDW-IG after December 2019

From: Rushforth, Peter (NRCan/RNCan) <peter.rushforth@canada.ca>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:22:01 +0000
To: "Tandy, Jeremy" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>, Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
CC: "public-sdwig@w3.org" <public-sdwig@w3.org>, Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, "ted@w3.org" <ted@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e547845f4f1741a08325c520c3070829@PEVDACDEXC004.birch.int.bell.ca>
Hi Jeremy and Linda,

Looks good to me.   On the other hand, I have comments. :-)

> what should it's terms of reference
> be?

In my mind, the SDWIG has always been about the webification of OGC standards and the spatialization of Web standards.  But perhaps that's too ambitious at the moment. 

We have been focusing on individual standards developments, whereas I think SDWIG provides a good opportunity to talk about aspects of standards and standards development that relate to both organizations. Thinking about the strengths that the two organizations bring to the SWDIG, perhaps we can still craft a re-chartering to leverage complementary strengths and hence provide advice to both.  

W3C: Web scale architecture (domain independence), accessibility, privacy, internationalization, performance, intersecting WHATWG / W3C membership, Community Groups program, ...

OGC: geospatial domain experts and expertise, crowdfunding / Innovation program, stable usable standards that are widely implemented, intersecting global SDI-Open Data / OGC membership ...

I think growing and improving the list of strengths of the other side should be in scope, through the activities and advice of the SDIWG.

Two meetings per year is appropriate, especially including  one at an OGC venue and one at TPAC, I think.  

Thanks for asking.

Cheers,
Peter


Peter Rushforth

Technology Advisor
Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation 
Natural Resources Canada / Government of Canada
peter.rushforth@canada.ca / Tel: 613-759-7915

Conseiller technique
Centre canadien de cartographie et d'observation de la Terre 
Ressources naturelles Canada / Gouvernement du Canada
peter.rushforth@canada.ca / TÚl: 613-759-7915


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tandy, Jeremy <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> Sent: July 12, 2019 6:57 AM
> To: public-sdwig@w3.org; Linda van den Brink
> <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; Scott Simmons
> <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>; Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>;
> ted@w3.org
> Subject: Rechartering the SDW-IG after December 2019
> 
> Hello SDW-IG folks...
> 
> The Spatial Data on the Web Interest Group will expire on 31-Dec-2019 as
> per its Charter [1]
> 
> There positive impact of collaboration between OGC and W3C is well
> recognised. The SDW-IG has been successful over the last 2-years in
> coordinating between OGC and W3C, and connecting people with potential
> collaborators and stakeholders. However, experience shows that work items
> of the SDW-IG largely remain "one-task, one-person". Other than review,
> there has been very limited group-interaction on work items. We conclude
> that the format of SDW-IG isn't well suited to engage collaborators on work
> items. Existing mechanisms are available to generate critical mass to develop
> proposals and contribute to work items: W3C has Community Groups (which
> require a proposer plus 5 supporting members to establish); OGC has the
> Innovation Programme and Domain Working Groups.
> 
> Note that the policies of both OGC and W3C state that standards must be
> developed within a Standards Working Group (SWG) specifically chartered
> for that purpose. As such, the SDW-IG cannot develop standards itself;
> instead it can support the development of a proposal to the point where a
> Charter for a SWG is sufficiently mature and has adequate support.
> 
> So - should SDW-IG continue and, if so, what should it's terms of reference
> be? Linda and I have synthesised the conversation during the face-to-face
> meeting in Leuven - here's what we heard (plus some sensible additions) ...
> 
> We, as chairs of the SDW-IG, think the SDW-IG should be re-charted, and for
> it to remain as a separate group (i.e. not merged into another groups such as
> the OGC Geosemantics DWG). Draft terms of reference for the re-chartered
> group are provided below.
> 
> Please can we have feedback by end of July so that we can continue the
> discussion and iterate toward a suitable new Charter?
> 
> Many thanks and best regards, Jeremy & Linda.
> 
> ---
> 
> SDW-IG will:
> * coordinate between OGC and W3C on shared interests (i.e. geospatial Web
> standards) - monitoring and, where necessary, liaising between groups from
> OGC and W3C.
> * identify areas where standards should be developed jointly by both W3C
> and OGC.
> * respond requests from OGC Architecture Board (OAB) and W3C Technical
> Architecture Group (TAG) to review materials relating to geospatial Web
> standards, and bring relevant matters to the attention of the OAB and TAG -
> [possibly via a quarterly slot on their agendas?].
> * periodically review the OGC Innovation Programme ideas issue tracker [2]
> to identify and prioritise important ideas relating to the geospatial Web
> standards.
> * periodically review the OGC Technology Trends [3].
> * provide a forum where early ideas for geospatial Web standards can be
> shared in an open, public forum (e.g. as a GitHub issue) until they migrate
> into a Community Group, Domain Working Group or Testbed activity for
> further development (see below).
> * provide introductions between originators of ideas for geospatial Web
> standards and potential collaborators and stakeholders in OGC and W3C.
> * seek out existing forums (e.g. W3C Community Group, OGC Domain
> Working Group, OGC Testbed / Innovation Programme) where ideas for
> geospatial Web standards can be developed to the point where they are
> mature enough to Charter a SWG; where no existing forums are a good fit,
> SDW-IG will support establishment of the most appropriate forum in OGC or
> W3C (development of the idea will occur within the designated group where
> resources such as mailing lists and GitHub repositories will be provided).
> * maintain references to the working resources of designated groups where
> ideas for geospatial Web standards are being developed, and track progress
> of development using the W3C's "strategy funnel" [4].
> * provide support to develop SWG Charters and help determine whether the
> SWG should reside in OGC or W3C, or be a joint SWG.
> * manage errata for: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices, Time Ontology,
> SSN/SOSA Ontology, SSN/SOSA Extensions and any other documents
> published by the SDW-WG and SDW-IG.
> 
> SDW-IG will largely work by correspondence (e.g. via mailing list and GitHub
> issues), complemented by face-to-face meetings (e.g. 2 per year?) and ad-
> hoc teleconferences (e.g. to discuss / review new ideas for geospatial Web
> standards).
> SDW-IG can publish OGC Discussion Papers, OGC White Papers, OGC Best
> Practices and W3C Notes - subject to the appropriate approvals processes.
> SDW-IG will have a designated staff contact from both OGC and W3C.
> 
> [1]: https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/charter.html
> [2]: https://github.com/opengeospatial/ideas/issues
> [3]: https://github.com/opengeospatial/OGC-Technology-
> Trends/blob/master/README.md
> [4]: https://github.com/w3c/strategy/labels/Geospatial
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2019 14:27:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:17:54 UTC