Thanks Xueyuan,
all, if you didn't read this, please note that per W3C Process you have to re-join the group, in particular to ensure we keep the Patent Policy boxes ticked properly.
cheers - and thanks to all those who have already rejoined :)
31.10.2016, 16:28, "Xueyuan Jia" <>:

Dear members of the Web Platform Working Group,

I'm relaying the Call for Participation to the Working Group's primarily public mailing list, to notify the group of its Revised Charter Approved.

Best regards,

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:Web Platform Working Group Revised Charter Approved: join the Web Platform Working Group (Call for Participation)
Date:Mon, 31 Oct 2016 23:10:06 +0800
From:Xueyuan Jia <>
Dear Advisory Committee Representative,

The Director is pleased to announce the re-charter of the Web Platform 
Working Group:

The revised charter extends the group through 30 March 2018. The major 
changes are one new deliverable (Microdata, minus the Microdata DOM 
API), some removed deliverables (URL, XmlHttpRequest-1 and Streams), 
other deliverables moved to a list of potential deliverables through 
incubation (see Results of the Call for Review below).

Please use the following form to join or re-join the group; the form 
will also instruct you how to nominate participants:

The Working Group chairs are Léonie Watson (The Paciello Group), Adrian 
Bateman (Microsoft) and Charles McCathie Nevile (Yandex). The Team 
Contacts are Xiaoqian Wu and Yves Lafon for a total of 1.0 FTE.

More information about the Working Group can be found at its homepage:

Results of the Call for Review

We called for review on 2 September 2016:

Thanks to the 28 Members who provided input:

The following comments were received during the review period:

* The FindText API should be solely owned by the Web Annotation WG [1][2][3]
This was a Formal Objection from Microsoft [1]. The FindText API was 
removed from the charter, and the Formal Objection was withdrawn [4].

* Microdata should not be added back to the charter [3][5]
This is a Formal Objection from Mozilla Foundation [5].
Following the concern of several members, we decided to remove the 
Microdata DOM API, as it never caught on, but to keep the syntax, as it 
is in use, and other members expressed direct interest in pursuing this. 
Unlike the Microdata API, the main implementors of this new 
specification will not be browsers, but existing metadata validators.

The size of the data sets using micro format should be enough to 
consider that Microdata already passed the incubation stage, like RDFa, 
Microformat and JSON-LD. (See [6]). Hence the decision to keep this item 
in the list of deliverable.

* Mandatory Incubation [7]
The issue of mandatory incubation was raised as it was felt as being a 
potential source of frictions and conflicts. The incubation process in 
the Web Platform WG is still an experiment and one year of 
experimentation is not long enough to draw conclusions. This 
experimentation needs to continue and be evaluated and is not a work 
mode that can be generalized to all Working Groups. The validity of this 
model and its applicability to other groups that share similar work mode 
will be discussed over time under the auspices of the Strategy 
Management [8].

* Relationship with the WhatWG [7]
The current goal is still to try to work in cooperation with the WhatWG 
as much as possible and this is one of the specific tasks of the 
Community Management [9]. The issue about relationship with the WhatWG 
work has been raised as a followup to a GitHub issue during the work on 
the charter [10]. Until we get more successful in engaging with the 
WHATWG, the Working Group and the charter must set the goals based on 
how we are currently engaging with them.

* Stability of the Potential Deliverable list [5][11]
The viability of specifications listed in the Potential Deliverable list 
was questioned. The deliverables listed here were Recommendation Track 
documents that never made decent progress during the life of the Working 
Group. As such their inclusion in that list show areas where the AC 
expressed interest in the past, but needs to go through the incubation 
process to become chartered deliverables again. This was clarified in 
the proposed charter [12].

* HTML-AAM [2]
Following discussions between the ARIA and Web Platform WGs [13], it was 
decided that it would be a deliverable under the sole responsibility of 
the Web Platform WG.

* Canvas [2]
Yandex raised the issue that Canvas would be better handled in a group 
dedicated to Graphics. Until we have a better way to split 
specifications in relevant buckets, it was decided to keep Canvas under 
the auspices of the Web Platform WG, an explicit liaison with the SVG 
Working Group on this topic was already in the charter.

* Definition of the normative Web Platform [3][14]
The Web Platform Working Group is working on a Note that references all 
HTML extension specifications:
There are open issues regarding missing documents:
Note that the document will only list HTML extensions and is not meant 
to list all extensions to the Web Platform. The Web Platform Working 
Group is one of many Groups engaged in defining extensions to the Web 
Platform and, despite its name, is not meant to encompass the overall 
Web Platform architecture.

* Operating Procedure [15]
The issue was raised that with a Working Group so large with so many 
deliverable, it was difficult to keep track of important decisions. The 
Working Group Work Mode document [16] was clarified with the following 
paragraph on the use of Call for Consensus:

    CFCs are conducted on GitHub. An issue is opened on the repo for the
    specification, and a notification email sent to to let the WG know. The GitHub issue and email
    will have a subject line that starts with "CFC" and includes both
    the subject of the CFC and the closing date.

* Scope too broad, impossible to work on only one specification [17]
The issue was raised that some companies have issues reviewing all the 
Calls for Exclusion pertaining to this Working Group. We tried in the 
past to split the Group (it was discussed during an AC Meeting, as 
explained in [18]), but nothing conclusive came out, as splitting the 
group in coherent parts is very difficult. Still, we definitely should 
find a way to allow Members who are interested in a technology to be 
able to contribute to it. Expect discussion with the Strategy Lead in 
the near future to try to find a solution to this issue.

Several editorial comments were received and incorporated in the charter 


This announcement follows section 7.1.2 of the W3C Process Document:

and the Call for Participation follows section 5.2.4 of the W3C Process 

Thank you,

For Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director,
Philippe Le Hegaret, Project Management Lead,
Xiaoqian Wu and Yves Lafon, Web Platform Working Group Team Contacts;
Xueyuan Jia, W3C Marketing & Communications

Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex - - - Find more at