- From: Olle Olsson <olleo@sics.se>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:08:22 +0100
- To: public-success-fail@w3.org
Steve P asked: "definition of success?" In the same way one can ask: "definition of failure?" (and of course: "is there a grey zone between success and failure?") For failure, at least separate between: (1) failure to reach the formal objectives specified for the work. Possibly evaluated at end of chartered period. (1.a) nothing that was planned to be completed was really finalized. Too tough challenge? To many ideas and no compromises agreed upon? (1.b) some deliverables were completed, but without having the whole package of planned deliverables completed, nothing can really be useful. and (2) failure to achieve the expected real-world effects. Deliverables completed as planned. Probably evaluated some time after completed work. (2.a) the targeted usage area seems to have become irrelevant (technology and business moves to other areas) (2.b) the targeted usage area is still relevant, but for some reasons the W3C specifications produced have not been adopted in practice, and no other technology solves this problem. (2.c) the targeted usage area is still relevant, but at some point in time other technology approaches became more popular, and the W3C technology was marginalized. Identifying failures is more easy when done well into the future (which in internet times could be one year after completed work). Identifying possible failures early (before work starts, or during work) is difficult. What to look at? Comparing technology approach to use cases? Comparing technology to competing technology (existing or in works)? Is W3C the best place to do the work? Are the critical stakeholders involved? Is there critical mass? Etc. So one can evaluate the technology being worked on, and one can evaluate the work being put into developing technology. On the page https://www.w3.org/wiki/AB/2014-2015_Priorities/w3c_work_success I was intrigued by the list of "Initial list of failures to learn from". For what reason are the technologies listed there called "failures"? For example, one can these days see quite a lot of enthusiasm about applications of RDF, but nevertheless it is on the failures list. /olle -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Olle Olsson olleo@sics.se Tel: +46 8 633 15 19 Fax: +46 8 751 72 30 [Svenska W3C-kontoret: olleo@w3.org] SICS [Swedish Institute of Computer Science] Box 1263 SE - 164 29 Kista Sweden ------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2014 16:08:52 UTC