Re: [DRAFT] WebCGM Charter Renewal Request

Chris,

As you will be involved in the Charter extension decision, could you 
please let us know if this request fits you,  before we sent it to W3M.

Thanks.



Lofton Henderson wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
> 
> Thanks for the first draft.  For my part, I'm basically happy with it 
> except for a couple of minor concerns.
> 
> First, I'd like Chris's input on one aspect, specifically the three 
> paragraphs following the numbered list.
> 
> Chris?
> 
> Basically, I'd like to hear whether Chris anticipates that the 
> discussion of future functional additions (2.x, etc) will cause any 
> problems with the extension request.
> 
> Other than that, assuming that those paragraphs are okay in concept, I 
> have a couple specific ideas for small improvements, embedded...
> 
> 
> At 10:51 AM 5/14/2007 +0200, Thierry Michel wrote:
> 
>> Dear Steve and Chris,
>>
>> The WebCGM Working Group requests a 6 month extension to its
>> charter in order to finalize uncompleted tasks from its current charter.
>> The WebCGM WG Charter is currently terminating on 31 May 2007 [1].
>>
>> The WebCGM Working Group has fulfilled most of its Mission and Scope 
>> [2] successfully, providing chartered deliverables [2b] with 
>> publication of a WebCGM 2.0 Recommendation [3] and an OASIS Standard 
>> [4],  an Interoperability Implementation Report [5], a Test Suite [6] 
>> and addressing a few WebCGM 2.0 Recommendation Errata [7].
>>
>> The WebCGM Working has not had time yet to finalize the following 
>> deliverables as mentionned in its charter[2b]:
>>
>> 1- collecting and publishing pending WebCGM 1.0 errata
>> 2- publication of a WebCGM 1.0 third release
>> 3- collecting and publishing WebCGM 2.0 errata, if required
>> 4- Organize a F2F to finalize these items.
>>
>>
>> Furthermore the WebCGM WG has a list of functionalities which were 
>> planed to get into WebCGM 2.0 Rec, but were not addressed for time 
>> reasons. There are also a set of new features the WG would like to 
>> work on for a future WebCGM 2.x version.
> 
> I wonder if it would be better to change "WebCGM WG" to "WebCGM experts" 
> in the first sentence?  I.e., to be vague about the organizational home 
> of the "list".  I would be tempted to reword this paragraph something like,
> 
> [[[
> Furthermore WebCGM experts have compiled a preliminary list of 
> functionalities which were arguably within the scope of the WebCGM 2.0 
> Rec, but were not addressed for timing reasons -- they arose too late in 
> the process.  There are also a set of new features that the WG [should 
> it be "WebCGM experts" here again?]  considers potentially desirable for 
> a future WebCGM 2.x version.
> ]]]
> 
> 
>> Currently there is a need to evaluate the amount of work for this 2.x 
>> version. The (OASIS) WebCGM TC should be finished sorting out its 
>> WebCGM 2.x desires by late summer.)
>>
>> The outcome of this evaluation could allow publication of a Working 
>> Group Note or an initial Requirement Document, falling under the 
>> WebCGM current Charter to "produce related usage guidelines as time, 
>> expertise, and other resources permit".[2b]
>>
>>
>> A resolution to request a charter extension was accepted by the WebCGM 
>> WG at during its telecon [8]. All WG members in good standing have 
>> indicated they support this charter extension  and will continue to 
>> support the work of the WebCGM WG.
> 
> So let's try to get the wording nailed down, and resolve this at the 
> Thursday (4/24) telecon.  Again, I'd like to hear from Chris on whether 
> we're inviting trouble with the mention of possible future work (which 
> would be under a re-Charter, of course).  And I'd like to hear other WG 
> members' thoughts as well.
> 
> 
>> If you should decide to approve this request, then, at your discretion,
>> you may consider granting more than 6 months (e.g., up through end of
>> this calendar year).
>>
>>
>> On behalf of Lofton Henderson, Chair of the WebCGM WG,
>>
>> Regards,
>> Thierry Michel.
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#duration
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#mission
>> [2b] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/webcgm-charter.html#deliverables
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-webcgm20-20070130/
>> [4] http://docs.oasis-open.org/webcgm/v2.0/OS/webcgm-v2.0-index.html
>> [5]http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/implementation-report.html
>> [6]http://www.w3.org/2006/Graphics/WebCGM/testsuite.html
>> [7]http://www.w3.org/2006/WebCGM20-errata.html
>>
>> [8]  to paste URI
>> --------------------------
> 
> Good work!
> 
> All for now,
> -Lofton.
> 
>

Received on Monday, 21 May 2007 06:46:35 UTC