RE: Merging with a WG

I don't have any particular preference,  However I would note that an
independent working group will have the narrowest charter, and therefore
the fewest IP commitments.  Breadth of IP commitments may be an issue
for some potential participants.  It's not an issue for Genesys and I
think that we will join no matter where it ends up, but I would like to
see the broadest participation possible.  

 

-          Jim 

 

From: Glen Shires [mailto:gshires@google.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 2:57 PM
To: Young, Milan
Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
Subject: Re: Merging with a WG

 

Yes, I'd like to hear everyone's nominations for potential W3C WGs.

 

I nominate WebApps. Prior to forming this CG we explored adding it to
the charter of WebApps, but that was hindered by a lack of specific
spec/scope. I expect more success this time because we'll be approaching
them after publishing our first draft of the spec (and thus also have an
inherently well-defined scope). 

 

/Glen Shires

 

 

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
wrote:

Although traffic on this list has lately been sparse, I believe this
community has generally made good progress cleaning up the XG report
into something that will be palatable to browser vendors.  I trust that
once northern hemisphere summer projects and vacations draw to a close,
we will resume discussions and publish our first draft in time for TPAC.

 

I suggest that we use this break to begin planning our transition into a
formal Working Group.  My goal would be to have the structure in place
by TPAC so that would could kickoff meaningful discussions F2F.  Do
other folks in this community support that goal?

 

A significant part of merging into a WG is finding the right home.
Several of us prefer the idea of merging with an existing group while
some have suggested a new group.  I suggest we start that decision by
reaching out to the existing groups to see if the charters are mutually
compatible.  If we can find a compatible home, then we put it as a vote
to this group whether to join.  If we cannot find a compatible group by
TPAC, then we create our own.  Does this sound like an acceptable
proposal?

 

Milan