[DRAFT] Transition request for CR

[DRAFT]  Transition request to be sent to  timbl@w3.org, steve@w3.org, 
chris@w3.org, cc'ing w3t-comm@w3.org and chairs@w3.org

Let me know if this document fits you.

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

This is a request for a Transition to CR.

* Title: "WebCGM 2.0"
* URI: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-webcgm20-20060905/
* Estimated publication date: 5 Sept 2006
* Document Abstract: see below
* Status section: see below

* Record of the decision to request the Transition:
During its WG F2F meeting, the WebCGM group has resolved to request 
Transition to CR. See
     http://www.w3.org/@@@

* Report of important changes to the document:
The changes that this version introduces from the Last Call Working 
Draft are only editorial and minor changes.
See Appendix D. Change Log 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-webcgm20-20060905/WebCGM20-Appendix.html#webcgm_changelog

* Evidence that the document satisfies group's requirements:
The group's initial requirements have not changed. The WG has fulfilled 
all requirements. See initial WebCGM 2.0 Requirements at
     http://www.cgmopen.org/technical/WebCGM_20_Requirements.html

* Evidence that dependencies with other groups met (or not):
WebCGM 2.0 has no normative references to W3C specifications that are 
not yet Proposed Recommendations.
Dependencies with other groups have been explored and ensuing issues 
resolved during the Last Call period.
See the Disposition of Comments document at
     http://www.w3.org/2006/07/03/WebCGM2-LastCallResponses.html

* Evidence that the document has received wide review:
Last Call Review announcement was sent to the chairs@w3.org list and to 
the public-webcgm@w3.org list on Mon, 26 Jun 2006.
We have especially requested review from WGs those listed for 
coordination in the WG Charter :  Hypertext CG, DOM IG, WAI project, 
I18N WG, Web API WG, QA IG. We received responses from I18N WG, Web API 
WG, and Steven Pemberton from the Hypertext CG. We have reminded the WAI 
project a couple of times.

Review from other organizations:
  - OASIS has reviewed the Last Call version, through their monthly meeting.
  - Peter Zimermann representing Technical Publication Specification 
Maintenance Group (TPSMG) of ASD, who maintain the S1000D Standard
  has reviewed the LC document.
  - Air Transport Association (ATA) has reviewed the LC document.


* Evidence that issues have been formally addressed.
All comments have been formally addressed.
See the Disposition of Comments document.
     http://www.w3.org/2006/07/03/WebCGM2-LastCallResponses.html

* Objections:
No objections have been received.

* Implementation information:

The CR exit criteria, as decided by the group and mentioned in the 
specification, are:
" 1. Sufficient reports of implementation experience have been gathered 
to demonstrate that the WebCGM 2.0 features are implementable and are 
interpreted in a consistent manner. To do so, the Working Group will 
insure that all features in the WebCGM 2.0 specification have been 
implemented at least twice in an interoperable way. This defines this as:
     * the implementations have been developed independently,
     * each test in the WebCGM 2.0 test suite has at least two passing 
implementations.

2. The Working Group releases a public test suite for WebCGM 2.0 along 
with an implementation report."


The WG expects the CR period to be 1 month (the minimal CR ending date 
is set to 05 October 2006). The WG expects Transition to PR early November.

During the CR period, the WebCGM WG will finalize and release a WebCGM 
2.0 test suite.
A preliminary WebCGM 2.0 test suite is available at
http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/testsuite.html

There is already a good amount of products implementing WebCGM 2.0, from 
Viewers and Printers Browser plug-ins and standalone viewers, Editors, 
Filters and Converters, WebCGM capable printers, etc.
See http://www.cgmopen.org/webcgm/products.html

There has been an "interoperability day" during the WebCGM WG F2F 
meeting in Koln, Germany,  Aug 23, 24, 25th 2006.
A preliminary implementation report with detailed matrix shows which 
software implements each feature of the specification.
See http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/implementation-report.html

The Working Group has identify specific features of the technical report 
as being "features at risk":
         * Pattern Size aspect of definable patterns.
         * Performance requirements for Miter limit.
         * Text on a path

* Patent Disclosures:
No patent disclosures have been made for any specifications of this group.
See WebCGM WG Patent Policy Status
       http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/39256/status

* Abstract:

"WebCGM — first published (1.0) in 1999 followed by a second (errata) 
release in 2001 — unifies potentially diverse approaches to CGM 
utilization in Web document applications, and therefore represents a 
significant interoperability agreement amongst major users and 
implementers of the ISO CGM standard. WebCGM finds significant 
application especially in technical illustration, electronic 
documentation, and geophysical data visualization, amongst other 
application areas.
WebCGM 2.0 adds a DOM (API) specification for programmatic access to 
WebCGM objects, and a specification of an XML Companion File (XCF) 
architecture, for externalization of non-graphical metadata. WebCGM 2.0, 
in addition, builds upon and extends the graphical and intelligent 
content of WebCGM 1.0, delivering functionality that was forecast for 
WebCGM 1.0, but was postponed in order to get the standard and its 
implementations to users expeditiously."
The design criteria for WebCGM aim at a balance between graphical 
expressive power on the one hand, and simplicity and implementability on 
the other. A small but powerful set of standardized metadata elements 
supports the functionalities of hyperlinking and document navigation, 
picture structuring and layering, and enabling search and query of 
WebCGM picture content.


* Status section:

"This section describes the status of this document at the time of its 
publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of 
current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical 
report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at 
http://www.w3.org/TR/.
Publication as a Candidate Recommendation does not imply endorsement by 
the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, 
replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is 
inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
W3C publishes a Candidate Recommendation to indicate that the document 
is believed to be stable and to encourage implementation by the 
developer community. The WebCGM Working Group expects to request that 
the Director advance this document to Proposed Recommendation when the 
following exit criteria have been met:
1. Sufficient reports of implementation experience have been gathered to 
demonstrate that the WebCGM 2.0 features are implementable and are 
interpreted in a consistent manner. To do so, the Working Group will 
insure that all features in the WebCGM 2.0 specification have been 
implemented at least twice in an interoperable way. This defines this as :
     * the implementations have been developed independently,
     * each test in the WebCGM 2.0 test suite has at least two passing 
implementations.
2. The Working Group releases a public test suite for WebCGM 2.0 along 
with an implementation report.
The WebCGM 2.0 test suite will add to the WebCGM 1.0 test suite at least 
one test case for any new feature introduced in WebCGM 2.0, covering the 
new DOM-related and XCF features, and the new static and "intelligence" 
feature.
The Working Group has identified the following features as "at risk". If 
not interoperably implemented by the end of the Candidate Recommendation 
period, these features will be loosen in the WebCGM Profile of the 
Proposed Recommendation version.
     * Pattern size aspect of definable patterns.
     * Performance requirements for Miter limit.
     * Text on a path
This document was developed by the WebCGM Working Group, part of the 
Graphics Activity. The Working Group expects to advance this Working 
Draft to Recommendation Status. This specification will remain a 
Candidate Recommendation until at least 05 October 2006.
This specification is based, in large part, on a work by the same name, 
WebCGM 2.0 an OASIS Committee Specification submitted to W3C as WebCGM 
2.0 Submission. This Member Submission is related to the previous W3C 
work on WebCGM 1.0, and draws on experiences with that format from 
implementors and users over five years. This Working Draft incorporates 
feedback and discussion following the Submission.
Please send comments on this document to the working group's public 
email list public-webcgm@w3.org (public archive). Use "[CR Comment]" in 
the subject line of your email.
Publication as a Candidate Recommendation does not imply endorsement by 
the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, 
replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is 
inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 
2004 W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent 
disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that 
page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual 
who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes 
contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance 
with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy."

-------------------------------------
For Lofton Henderson, WebCGM Working Group Chair,
Thierry Michel, WebCGM staff contact.
-- 
Thierry Michel
W3C

Received on Thursday, 24 August 2006 15:02:21 UTC