RE: IG charter: modification suggestion

Dear all,

 

It seems very nice draft charter, thanks for the great work for those who
outlined this.

 

I would like to contribute this great work by asking a few questions for
clarification and giving opinions as TV maker.

 <Questions for clarification>

1.     Timeline : From the mail thread so far, the IG officially will start
around this year end, but the timelines section below reflects IG started
and end day will be Christmas eve. Several participants including me
mentioned IG starting should be immediate. Is this opinion accepted?

 

2.     Priority : The date below seems to be all the related works target
end date. At Tokyo, consensus is after 3 months WebonTV IG, WebonTV WG will
ensue.

Initial use cases we are favored are chosen for WG activities. What we have
to do in IG is to elaborate those use cases, requirement for them, and
timeline as far as I could understand. However, during the initial drafting
mail discussion more exquisite 4 categories came up: WG internal works and
external relationship works. I think this is very good approach and why the
end date of IG is 2012. If this is the case, we could arrange the work
items of each categories end timing according to industry priority
consensus during IG work.

 

3.     Decision : If we will handle 4 web and TV related categories here,
we need to have decision entity to adjust all the related topics. I’m not
sure W3C has this kind of special entity for single topic. If we continue
IG until 2012, IG scope could be extended that far. If there’s scattered
entities for decision it will be very chaotic.

 

<Opinions as TV maker>

1.     Regarding scope, we already tried TV and Web in 1998 and still the
topic tastes very good.  I’m technically fine to discuss both directions
TV towards Web and Web towards TV, however if we focus initial goal for
this activity in mind that WebonTV means various web technologies
selection/modification fitting onto large screen and resource scarce TV, I
would like to suggest we stick to WebonTV as superior priority. Unlike PC
which can enjoy limitless degree of freedom of whatever web technologies
needed, TV has limited capability of freedom and even storage is almost
marginal at point of sales. So standardization to eliminate duplicating
things is very very important for TV.

 

2.     This direction guide will help efficient convergence of industry
consensus at the age of Smart TV. Content providers including broadcasters
are bewildered when discussing with TV makers in that too many seemingly
same web technologies are available. Server side players also have a
headache of selection. If W3C guides entire industry with reference
platform, it would be great help.

 

Best regards,

HJ

 

From: 
Sent: 없음
To: public-web-and-tv@w3.org
Subject: IG charter: modification suggestion

 

*	Scope <> 
*	Deliverables <> 
*	Dependencies <> 
*	Participation <> 
*	Communication <> 
*	Decision <>  Policy
*	Patent <>  Disclosures 
*	About this <>  Charter

 <http://www.w3.org/> W3C <http://www.w3.org/UbiWeb/> UBI Domain


Web and TV Interest Group Charter


The mission of the Web and TV Interest Group ( <http://www.w3.org/WAI/IG/>
WATWebTV IG), part of the W3C Ubiquitous Web Domain
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/IPO/> , is to provide a forum for minimum
clarification about the conceptual relationship between Web and TV,
especially the architectual relationship between the services on Web and
the TV services; to review of deliverables under development by other W3C
groups; to identify requirements and potential solutions to ensure that the
Web can function effectively with TV services on TV devices and TV-like
devices, and vice versa. i.e. TV can function effectively on various
devices with services on the Web as well. ; and to propose work items
either in the form of new W3C Working Groups, or specific work that should
be done in existing Working Groups.

Join the Web <http://www.w3.org/WAI/IG/>  and TV Interest Group mailing
list.


End date

30 November 2012 30 June 2013


Confidentiality

Proceedings are Public <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-
20051014/comm.html#confidentiality-levels> . 


Initial Chairs

FUNAHASHI Yosuke - Tomo-Digi 

KAWAMORI Masahito - NTT

Giuseppe PASCALE - Opera Software

HyeonJae Lee - LG Electronics


Initial Team Contacts
(FTE %: 10)

Kazuyuki Ashimura


Usual Meeting Schedule

Teleconferences: Weekly or biweekly No teleconferences 
Face-to-face: As required up to 3 per year Between none and two annually


Scope


The Web and TV Interest Group's scope of work includes:

*	Minimum clarification about the conceptual relationship between Web
and TV, especially the architectual relationship between the services on
Web and the TV services;
*	Identification of important requirements for the Web to function
effectively with TV services on TV devices and TV-like devices;
*	Identification of important requirements for TV to function
effectively on various devices with services on the Web;
*	review and discussion of deliverables under development by other
W3C groups, which touch on the use of the Web andon TV;
*	exploration of barriers to the Web and TV services working on TV
devices and TV-like devices, and potential solutions;
*	exchanging information about Web and TV activities around the world.


Success Criteria


*	Participation via mailing list subscription and postings from
people representing various stakeholer communities, including
braooadcasters, hardware and software developers, telecom companies,
application developers, regulators and users.
*	Members of the Interest Group join relevant Working Groups and
drive the development of work items.
*	Constructive feedback on W3C deliverables posted for review on the
Web and TV IG mailing list.


Deliverables


The primary deliverables of the Web and TV Interest Group are
recommendations for work items to ensure that the Web and TV can function
complementary and cooperatively on TVdevices and TV-like devices. We'll
classify the topics suggested during the "Web on TV" workshop into these
four categories. 

Category1:

Topics that should be done by the possible new WG which could be launched
next year.

Category2:

New/additional requirements for existing WGs. We should sort out the items
and make sure that the right requirements get funneled into the right WGs.

Category3:

Liaison work that goes on outside W3C. We should just document this for the
record but should not try to re-create existing standards within W3C.

Category4:

The areas we are uncertain at the moment like DRM. We should first list the
topics for this category, and then discuss whether the uncertain stuff ends
up in WG or be requirements for an existing group or be outside the scope
of W3C.

These will either take the form of recommendations to (and participation
in) existing working groups, or proposals for and participation in one or
more new Working Groups, according to the nature of the work that needs to
be done.

In addition the group will review and comment on draft documents from W3C
groups; and raise issues that relate to the core mission of the Interest
Group.


Timelines


The Interest Group should deliver a preliminary set of work recommendations
by 24 December 2010. These shall be based on the results of the W3C Web on
TV workshop held in Tokyo, Japan, in September 2010, and input provided to
the Interest Group. These can take the form of requirements presented to
existing W3C Working Groups, and / or proposed new work requiring a new
Working Group to be chartered.

Timelines for review of work from other groups will depend on the
deliverables from those groups being available. Participants in this group
should expect between two and four weeks to review relevant deliverables.


Dependencies and Liaisons


W3C Groups


The Web and TV IG provides a forum for review and discussion of draft
deliverables from many W3C groups. Among the most important groups are
likely to be: 

*	SVG WG
*	HTML WG
*	Internationalization Core WG
*	Web Applications WG
*	SYMM WG
*	Video in the Web Activity
*	Device APIs and Policy WG
*	Geolocation WG
*	Multimodal Interaction WG
*	Voice Browser WG
*	Protocols and Formats WG
*	Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WG
*	Semantic Web Activity

Web format Groups

CSS Working group

Device APIs and Policies Working Group

Geolocation Working Group

HTML Working Group

SVG Working Group

Web Applications Working Group

Web Notification Working Group

Horizontal groups

Web accessibility Initiative (most technical groups)

Internationalisation Activity


External Groups


There are a number of external groups important to the TV industry, or
working in related areas regarding the Web and TV. The Interest Group
should determine whom to communicate with and maintain communication with
them. groups such as For example,

*	ITU-T
*	ARIB
*	IPTV Forum Japan
*	Open IPTV Forum / HbbTV
*	YouView / Project Canvas
*	IETF
*	ANSI
*	OASIS
*	DLNA
*	ETSI
*	WAC (Wholesale Application Community)
*	DECE

TV Industry

OIPF / HbbTV

ITU-T

Mobile Industry

WAC

Internet technology

IETF

Consumer Electronics Industry

This is not intended as an exhuastive list, but illustrative of groups
working on related technologies


Participation


Participation in the Web and TV Interest Group requires W3C membership. But
participation in the Web and TV Interest Group's mailing list is open to
the public. There are no minimum requirements for participation in this
group. Participants are strongly encouraged to take advantage of frequent
opportunities to review and comment on deliverables from other groups.

The Chair may call occasional meetings consistent with the W3C Process
requirements for meetings.


Communication


This group primarily conducts its work on the public mailing list public-
web-tv@w3.org (archive <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/> ).
Specific documents under review usually have a designated mailing list for
comments, which is included in the document itself and in the review notice.

Information about the group (documents under review, face-to-face meetings,
etc.) is available from the Web and TV Interest Group home page <http://www.
w3.org/WAI/IG/> .


Decision Policy


Consistent with its mission, this group is not a decision-making body, but
rather provides a forum for discussion and advice on different topics
relating to the Web and TV. Where there is agreement among the group on
requirements, these will be forwarded as a consensus position. Where the
group does not reach agreement, the different positions will be forwarded,
with any decisions to be made by a relevant woorking group according to its
processes.


Patent Disclosures 


The Web and TV Interest Group provides an opportunity to share perspectives
on the topic addressed by this charter. W3C reminds Interest Group
participants of their obligation to comply with patent disclosure
obligations as set out in Section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy. While the
Interest Group does not produce Recommendation-track documents, when
Interest Group participants review Recommendation-track specifications from
Working Groups, the patent disclosure obligations do apply.

For more information about disclosure obligations for this group, please
see the W3C Patent Policy Implementation.


About this Charter


This charter has been created according to section 6.2 of the Process
Document. In the event of a conflict between this document or the
provisions of any charter and the W3C Process, the W3C Process shall take
precedence.

  _____  

Charter authors: Charles McCathieNevile, Kazuyuki Ashimura, Yosuke
Funahashi 

Copyrightⓒ 2010 W3C ® ( <http://www.csail.mit.edu/> MIT ,
<http://www.ercim.org/> ERCIM , Keio <http://www.keio.ac.jp/> ), All Rights
Reserved.

$Date: 2010-09-16$