- From: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:40:02 +0100
- To: <public-social-web-talk@w3.org>
Hi Michael, I think maybe we have hit on a very important distinction between what has been commonplace in W3C and the goals with which I, for one, have entering the process. Michael spoke when describing successful past XGs of "finding out which aspects are worth being standardised" So far I haven't seen any mention of standards in this Unified (or the two more focused) XG charter. Should "finding out which aspects are worth being standardised" be done prior to forming the XG? Or during the XG? The objectives of the current charter(s) are more to map and identify gaps/propose strategies/build (as in the FOAF+ project Henry proposed). Most of the deliverables are reports, a few use cases, the work of the group might be to prepare reports based on research it performs in the field. Just out of curiosity, are there, in the history of W3C, XGs which function well and yet are not focused on standardization? Christine Christine Perey PEREY Research & Consulting cperey@perey.com mobile (Swiss): +41 79 436 68 69 mobile in Barcelona +34 65218026 (February 15-19 2009) from US: +1 617 848 8159 from anywhere (Skype): Christine_perey
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2009 08:41:07 UTC