[minutes] 2014-10-03 Webizen Task Force meeting

Hi all,

Today's teleconference minutes are at:
   http://www.w3.org/2014/10/03-webizen-minutes.html

Text snapshot:
--------------
                    Webizen Task Force teleconference
                              03 Oct 2014
    [2]Agenda
       [2]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webizen/2014Sep/0064.html
    See also: [3]IRC log
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2014/10/03-webizen-irc

Attendees
    Present
           Coralie Mercier, Veronica Thom, Jeff Jaffe, Léonie
           Watson, Julian Harriott, Ann Bassetti
    Regrets
    Chair
           Jeff Jaffe
    Scribe
           Coralie Mercier

Contents
      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Interpretation of the survey results
          2. [6]Naming of the program
          3. [7]Free flow comments from the survey
          4. [8]Wrap-up, next steps, dissemination
      __________________________________________________________

    <koaliie> [9]Previous (2014-09-05)

       [9] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/05-webizen-minutes.html

    <scribe> scribenick: koalie

    [Jeff starts]

Interpretation of the survey results

    Jeff: the purpose of this call is for the Webizen TF to use the
    results of the survey to create a proposal for a Webizen
    Program
    ... that we'd take to W3C management to seek support, next week
    or the following week
    ... and take it to the W3C Advisory Committee at the end of the
    month

    [Ann joins]

    <koaliie> [10]Consolidated results of the public Webizen survey

      [10]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webizen/2014Oct/0002.html

    <koaliie> [11]Quick overview of public survey we ran between
    September 10-30

      [11]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webizen/2014Oct/0000.html

    Jeff: I read the survey results and to me the results flow out
    of the survey
    ... I'll read what I think is obvious from the survey results
    ... Q1: "Should W3C reach out to the broader Web community to
    create such a program for increased affiliation?"

    Jeff: 195 people said yes (out of 205)
    ... Q2: "Would you be interested in joining this program?"
    ... most of the people chose "show me where to sign up" (87)
    ... If all sign up I'm confident that we'd not lose money if we
    started a program
    ... Q3: "Should the program be designed as a minimalist program
    (point A)?"
    ... a decent majority said so
    ... my conclusion is that it should start minimalist
    ... now, some people said that it should not
    ... a few benefits from those listed subsequently, but not too
    much, should be appropriate

    <veronica> yes

    Jeff: with the promise of more benefits later
    ... Q4: "Should there be benefits that increase W3C posture as
    a community?"
    ... 133 said yes, 7 said no, 65 said "not important"

    <AnnBassetti> yup

    Jeff: [goes over a few in the list of ranked popular benefits
    in response to Q5]

    <Julian_> yes

    Jeff: Q6: "Should there be tangible benefits to this program
    (point C)?"
    ... Here, my sense is that it's pretty split
    ... one quarter said yes, one quarter said no and a majority
    said "not important to me".
    ... we could skip this altogether
    ... but in Q7, 90 people said "Discounts of W3C services" would
    be a nice tangible benefit.

    <veronica> +1 to Training discounts

    Jeff: Is that a reasonable interpretation of the survey?

    <Julian_> +1

    <antoniofullone> +1

    <LJWatson> +1

    Jeff: Q8: "Should there be a mechanism where Webizens are
    represented at the decision making of W3C (point D)?"
    ... I think we should do that, per results
    ... Q9 shows the survey speaks
    ... Program could look like: supporters page and CEO call, +
    one tangible benefit (discount)
    ... we'd need to define representation groups.

Naming of the program

    Jeff: Q10 "Should we name this program the Webizen program?"
    ... That got sufficient opposition to warrant to go through the
    available choices
    ... or make another survey, and come up with a few other
    choices
    ... not necessarily before TPAC

    <AnnBassetti> ~5 choices

    <Zakim> koalie, you wanted to offer a nth suggestion

    Coralie: Web Society? I checked, it's not in use, and it's
    exactly what the program inspires me.

    Jeff: I like it, it would be a valid thing to put in the survey

    <antoniofullone> my 2 cents: I like Open web supporter, even if
    I think this name is pretty ok, at least it make sense

    Jeff: I wouldn't want to choose it without putting it to
    scrutiny
    ... It sounds like it's competing with Internet Society

    [Coralie: +1 I thought that too re: compete with ISOC]

    <AnnBassetti> from the list, I like "W3C Individual
    Participant" -- because it seems parallel to our other
    categories

    Léonie: looking at the list we got
    ... some described the program, some the participants of the
    program
    ... should we look at this?
    ... Web society, for example, doesn't look at participant

    Jeff: Good point; if the name describes the people, it's easy
    to reuse as program name

    Julian: do we know the geographic location of the people who
    took the survey?

    Coralie: Nope, we didn't ask the question and our system didn't
    have any way to find out

    Jeff: We debated that and chose not to include the question, to
    not make the survey too long and drive people away

Free flow comments from the survey

    Jeff: Then we got free flow comments
    ... nothing jumped at me as a reason to rethink the whole thing

    [Coralie: same]

    Jeff: If we have a consensus, I'll write this up in some formal
    proposal
    ... and present it to W3M which meets on Wednesdays
    ... the AC proposal will be on 27-Oct during TPAC
    ... a proposal which addresses the strong sense from the
    community that this should allow more engagement in W3C
    ... and addresses the concern the AC expressed in June that we
    do not offer in this program benefits that are reserved to the
    AC
    ... I think we're in better shape and I hope we are.

    Ann: I thought it was a cool survey
    ... interested in geographic source of the respondents

    [Coralie too!]

    Ann: About the language we use to describe; one commenter said
    "you refer to Web Developers, what about the rest of us?"
    ... I relate to that and wanted to emphasise this

    Jeff: Great point.
    ... there was text in question 9 (Webizens to band together to
    form "Developer Groups"), and in the preamble (larger Web
    community)
    ... You're right, we should not restrict; we think of people by
    interest, by regions, etc.

    Ann: Somebody else spoke to the point of not only wanting to
    review charters
    ... [Ann reads]
    ... the point means more than charter review
    ... I'm sure we'll have a bunch of iterations
    ... that comment was useful

    Jeff: Yes definitely
    ... that comment also speaks to how we create the
    representation groups (cf. Q9)

    <Julian_> +1 to Ann's comments

Wrap-up, next steps, dissemination

    <veronica> koalie ++

    Ann: Thanks Coralie for the great work and redoing the survey
    and dissemination

    Coralie: Thank you!

    Jeff: And Julian we also got good support from your colleague
    and enhanced our survey
    ... please extend our thanks

    Ann: In the background, I had a suggestion on how to advertise
    this
    ... I heard a suggestion about going to FOSDEM to advertise
    this

    Jeff: FOSDEM is a great conference around open source and linux
    ... Yes, that would be a great place for outreach

    Ann: I responded go for it :)

    Jeff: AC first, obviously

    <Zakim> koalie, you wanted to mention french web conf next
    fortnight

    Coralie: I'm thinking of attending Paris Web on my free time;
    it's the popular French web conference that has been around 10
    or so years
    ... if it's not premature, and if I end up going, I was
    thinking I might do some outreach.

    Jeff: The whole thing is extremely public
    ... no problem telling people what we're up to

    Ann: I think it's a great idea Coralie, the more we can tell
    and point to, the better
    ... it's in the spirit of Ian sending Advance Notices, this is
    the sort of situation we're in

    Jeff: We should talk about it, definitely; I meant that holding
    a booth at fosdem was premature

    <veronica> how about W3C cards with QCR code

    [+1]

    Jeff++ for wrangling this whole effort

    <AnnBassetti> yes, indeed!!!

    Jeff: I'm not sure we'll have more calls

    Jeff: I'll send updates in e-mail of course

    Ann: If you want help during TPAC, or pairing, let me know

    Jeff: The webizen have spoken, I'll carry their message forward

    <veronica> bye

    [adjourned]

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [12]scribe.perl version
     1.138 ([13]CVS log)
     $Date: 2014-10-03 14:08:58 $

      [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/



-- 
  Coralie Mercier  -  W3C Communications Team  -  http://www.w3.org
mailto:coralie@w3.org +336 4322 0001 http://www.w3.org/People/CMercier/

Received on Friday, 3 October 2014 14:15:23 UTC