Fwd: Informal CfC on views on allowing abandoned SysApps specs to move to a community group - For Jose Manuel Cantera Fonseca

I forgot to forward this one sent to me last week.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: 	JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA 
<josemanuel.canterafonseca@telefonica.com>
To: 	Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Subject: 	Re: Need editors feedback -> Fwd: Informal CfC on views on 
allowing abandoned SysApps specs to move to a community group
Date: 	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:13:47 +0000



Hi,

No objection on my side.

Thanks, best


-------- Forwarded Message --------
To: 	public-sysapps@w3.org

Date: 	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:33:06 -0700
From: 	Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Subject: 	Informal CfC on views on allowing abandoned SysApps specs to 
move to a community group



The SysApps WG charter expired 1 October 2014[1].  One of the two Chairs 
left the WG [2] in early December and the other changed employers (in a 
WG under an active charter it would be expected that there would be a 
renomination or new Chair when that happens).  Back on 14 December 2014, 
after the Charter expired, I made a request for a CfC to support 
relicensing abandoned specs from SysApps WG [3].  That wasn't responded 
to.   I'm going to do an informal CfC myself now, asking for WG members 
opinion about the following.  (We may not have active WG or a Chair at 
this point, but we do have the relevant people on this list whose 
opinions the Director and Advisory Committee would want later in a 
request to move specs to a Community Group).

There is a W3C policy that allows relicensing abandoned specs [4] so 
they can be moved to a Community Group (or worked on elsewhere).  That 
process calls for seeking the opinion of the WG.  It also applies only 
to specs abandoned by the WG and that had reached FPWD (so WDs not 
editor's drafts before FPWD).  The specs below were contributed 
initially by Intel Corporation.  We still have interest in developing 
them, but it is pointless to try to do that in the SysApps WG without 
the possibility of two implementations.  We see no possibility for the 
SysApps WG to successfully recharter in its present form and we don't 
think these specs would be included in that if it changed.  (There are 3 
other specs beyond FPWD that this could be done for, but this CFC is 
limited only to the ones that came from Intel.  There could be other 
informal CfC's for the others.)

The purpose of this informal CfC is to determine consensus on the 
following proposition:
The members of the SysApps WG support permanently stopping SysApps work 
on the following specs: Contacts, Messaging, Telephony.   Furthermore, 
the members do not object to moving these specs to Community Groups 
where other Community Groups or anyone outside W3C would be allowed to 
take and develop them (as allowed by the Community Group Contributor 
License Agreement).

Please respond be end of day 27 March 2014 (anywhere). As usual in a 
CfC, silence is considered agreement with the proposal, but a direct 
response is preferred.  It would be very helpful to express any objection.

What we're looking for here is responses from the group that the W3C 
Director and Advisory Committee  could take into account in considering 
whether to allow the relicensing necessary to move the specs into a 
Community Group.  (so no need for anyone to judge consensus - they can 
look at the CfC and see judge whether there was consensus themselves.  
Specifically, if anyone responds to this that they don't want these 
specs moved to a Community Group, that would certainly be considered in 
a later decision (by the Advisory Committee and W3C Director, not this 
WG).  We would also welcome responses to this list from previous member 
who quit the WG. (We'll likely quit ourselves fairly soon.)

[1] http://www.w3.org/2012/09/sysapps-wg-charter 
<http://www.w3.org/2012/09/sysapps-wg-charter>
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2014Dec/0000.html
[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2014Dec/0005.html
[4] http://www.w3.org/2014/12/relicense.html





------------------------------------------------------------------------

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, 
puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso 
exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el 
destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, 
divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud 
de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le 
rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda 
a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is privileged and 
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or 
entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution 
or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately 
reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error 
and then delete it.

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu 
destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é 
para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa 
senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, 
utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em 
virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, 
rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e 
proceda a sua destruição