Re: Re-chartering of the Second Screen Working Group

Sorry for the late response Francois.  Overall scope and deliverables look
good to me.

Two questions on timelines:

1. The revised charter commits the group to deliver a FPWD of Presentation
API Level 2 in Q2 2017.  I think it may be worth discussing at the F2F the
level of interest in generating Level 2, and whether we have enough
deferred feature work in the queue at the moment to merit immediate work.
The F2F may generate additional feature requests that make a stronger case.

Also, one of the goals I would hope for Level 2 would be to gather feedback
from Web developers on the V1 API and make improvements that benefit them.
Given implementation satus, the time frame might not be quite enough time
to do that.  What is your experience with similar specs?

2. For Presentation API V1, both PR and TR are scheduled for Q1 2017.  Is
that realistic and in line with the time frame for similar specs?

m.


On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Working Group,
>
> Unless someone yells in the next few hours, I will assume that you all had
> time to take a look at the draft charter and that you are fine with it. In
> particular, I will take the draft charter to W3C Management for review
> beginning of next week.
>
> Please get in touch with me as soon as possible if you need more time to
> review the charter, or if you feel the scope needs to change. You will of
> course also have the opportunity to raise concerns through your Advisory
> Committee representative during the call for review.
>
> Thanks!
> Francois.
>
>
> > De : Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org]
> > Envoyé : vendredi 2 septembre 2016 19:53
> >
> > Hello Second Screen WG participants,
> >
> > Our charter expires end of October. The group needs to renew the charter
> > before that to finalize its work on the Presentation API and on the
> Remote
> > Playback API. Based on discussions we had at last F2F, my understanding
> is
> > that there is no real incentive to change the scope of the Working Group
> > right now (that need may arise later on depending on the outcomes of
> > discussions in the Community Group).
> >
> > With that in mind, I prepared a draft of a possible new charter for your
> > review:
> > https://www.w3.org/2014/secondscreen/charter-2016.html
> >
> > Main changes are:
> > - I dropped "Presentation" from the group's name to reflect practice.
> We're
> > basically known as the "Second Screen Working Group"
> > - The group would be chartered for another year with the same scope
> > - I updated the deliverables section to reflect current status and
> current
> > plans
> > - I noted the possibility to work on a version 2 of the Presentation API
> in
> > particular, noting that it won't be final by the end of the charter and
> that a
> > new charter, possibly with a new scope, might be needed after that.
> >
> > I tried to keep the diff with the previous charter minimal on purpose,
> to ease
> > your review, that of W3M and that of the W3C Advisory Committee when a
> > call for review is issued:
> > http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F201
> > 4%2Fsecondscreen%2Fcharter.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2
> > F2014%2Fsecondscreen%2Fcharter-2016.html
> >
> > Could you review that draft by end of next week (9 September) and let me
> > know whether it fits your needs or whether you have other views?
> > I will take the draft charter to W3C Management for review once that is
> > done.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Francois.
> >
>
>
>
>