RE: [POLL] WebCGM Charter Extension Request

Yes we should submit the Charter extension request.

Benoit Bezaire 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lofton Henderson
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 1:03 PM
To: WebCGM WG
Subject: [POLL] WebCGM Charter Extension Request



WebCGM WG,

Please respond TO LIST -- archived answer is essential.

Please respond as soon as possible, but no later than Tuesday, 5/29.

QUESTION:  Do you agree that the WebCGM WG should submit the following
Charter extension request?  Yes or no?  (If "no", then provide the
reasons for your negative vote).

If this poll repeats our informal unanimous "yes" position from earlier
telecons and email, then I will circulate a results summary, edit the
paragraph starting "A resolution to request a charter extension..." and
the reference [8], and send the request to Chris and Steve.

Thanks,
-Lofton.

==== proposed extension request follows =====

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 mentioned 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 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. Some new features that might be potentially desirable for a
future WebCGM 2.x version are also under discussion.

During its extension period, the WG will monitor these external
developments, and will decide before the end of the extension period
whether there is justification and requirement to re-charter the WG with
appropriate scope, to encompass the new work.

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.

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


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

Received on Monday, 28 May 2007 12:56:21 UTC