- From: Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 20:50:29 +0200
- To: "public-webizen@w3.org" <public-webizen@w3.org>
Hi all,
Today's teleconference minutes are at:
https://www.w3.org/2014/09/05-webizen-minutes.html
Text snapshot:
--------------
Webizen Task Force teleconference
05 Sep 2014
[2]Agenda
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webizen/2014Sep/0006.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/05-webizen-irc
Attendees
Present
Veronica Thom, Coralie Mercier (koalie), Tim Holborn
(mediaprophet), Jeff Jaffe, Michiel Leenaars, Brian
Kardell, Armin Haller, Olle Olsson, Virginie Galindo
Regrets
Ann Bassetti, Georg Rehm
Chair
Jeff Jaffe
Scribe
koalie, veronica
__________________________________________________________
<koaliie> [6]Previous (2014-08-20)
[6] http://www.w3.org/2014/08/20-webizen-minutes.html
<veronica> hi all
<koalie> scribenick: koalie
<mediaprophet> :)
Jeff: We're into our 3rd or 4th call + had extensive
discussions on the mailing list
... we had a task force in the spring, presented a proposal to
the Advisory Committee, they rejected it
... our focus since reboot has been on a survey
... We made good progress and today is the final review of the
questionnaire
... intent is to send next Monday, 8-Sep
... we'll tweet it to 93.4K W3C followers
... we'll send it to the W3C advisory committee
... we'll make public mentions of it so not only twitter users
can take it
... survey will last 3 weeks
... the week of the 29-Sep we'll have another TF teleconference
... to review the results and finalise the structure of the
program
... in order to present at the next AC meeting the week of
October 27
... let's go to the survey
<koaliie> [7]draft Webizen Program interest survey
[7] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/webizen-survey/
Jeff: go to the survey, please
... we took mostly what was in the wiki
... I prefer that people look at the instrument itself
... so you see the actual survey rather than the outline in the
wiki
Tim: How are you reflecting in the intro that W3C is changing
as the world evolves?
... side and ideology, v-a-v HTML, also accelerating
participation (cf. actions with IGF)
Jeff: Our focus on industry is a way, Community Groups is
another; we're changing in so many ways, I didn't want to lose
my audience is a too long manifesto
... if you have suggestions, after reading the prologue,
please, send them.
Michiel: I'm reading this as though it were written for a 4th
grader
... positioning is very abstract
... it wouldn't appeal
Jeff: Currently, what we're trying to do with that, if you look
at the bottom of the prologue, there is a link to the goals of
the program which are a bit more specific
... to your point, I'm not an expert in either writing or
creating surveys
... So I'd love to get more input from people
[Virginie joins]
Jeff: We could provide in the survey a link to a longer
description
Michiel: Can we skip the questions if you don't reply yes?
Jeff: No, unfortunately, that is a known limitation of the
instrument
Tim: [question was about whether the introduction of the
program, provides a review function that allows it to be
reviewed, refined, and improved once the program has developed
(and obtains take-up, etc.)]
Jeff: That's my intention, it's not overly explicit
... In question 5, one of the answers, the 2nd, that's a
somewhat weak example which reflects what you're requesting
Jeff: I don't know if there is a place where we should make
this stronger in the wiki or survey
... to show we're on the same page
<michiell> I think all the yes/no questions can go away
<michiell> For instance question 8 could be deleted if question
9 has a option 'no tangible benefits' at the end
<michiell> That would reduce the amount of questions
Tim: how many languages is this survey being offered in?
Coralie: English; I could provide French translation
Coralie: but then, why not other languages? how long would that
delay opening the survey?
Tim: It's worth thinking about it
Jeff: Great idea
... Coralie how long would it take?
Coralie: Probably a day or so
Jeff: I'm happy to delay this a day or two to give the option
for people to fill out the survey in their own language
... we could translate in 20 languages or so
<virginie> could help Koalie reading french translation, once
done
Coralie: note: English is the work language of the W3C
Tim: there is a demand, still
<mediaprophet> +1
<scribe> ACTION: Coralie to get survey, once final, translated
in W3C Offices languages [recorded in
[8]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/05-webizen-minutes.html#action01]
Jeff: there is nothing technical in the survey and foreign
people are more used to technical English
... A non-technical survey might benefit from being
multi-lingual
<mediaprophet> +1
Jeff: it also signals to the world that we're taking extra
steps to be inclusive
... a couple-day delay is fine
Virginie: I wanted to check when the finalization of the survey
takes place, when is it frozen?
Jeff: We plan to complete and freeze the survey in today's
meeting
... and run survey from sep 8-29
Jeff: with translations, this slips a bit.
<scribe> scribenick: veronica
armin: I have a question about #7
... unique member id #, maybe extend with uri or url
... could be more clear for people
<ahaller2> Armin: Listing your profile on the W3C website and
Name listed on our Supporters page (with # years) seem to be
similar for people. Maybe we can combine them to one answer.
jeff: q7 are radio buttons
... and you will be able to type multiple
... there is a bug with q7
jeff: should allow multiple selection
koalie: I'll fix this
jeff: and q9
... this is a fantastic beta team!
tim: with 9, maybe keep it simple, way to provide suggestions
jeff: we thought about that
... problem is unless we get hundreds of people answering the
survey, we won't have critical mass
<ahaller2> +1 for other suggestions
tim: how about using some kind of tags?
jeff: yes, that's a technological solution
... if I'm the first one and everyone sees my ideas, but if I'm
the last one, no one sees my ideas
... at the moment I'm just trying to get this off the ground
tim: accepted
jeff: so far lots of great comments
brianK: there was a proposal, not the best but not bad
... general consensus
... not very clear, wishy washy
... so that's where we are right now?
jeff: which proposal?
<michiell> I've just sent an alternative introduction to the
mailing list.
<michiell> I think the 100 dollar should be part of the
questionnaire
brian: basically an electoral proposal, $100 annual fee
jeff: that proposal - wanting more, less - was rejected by AC
briank: that's what I meant
... now soul searching what this should be
... sent some comments in email
... wondering are we definitely saying this has to be a
membership program that requires a fee?
jeff: this goes back to our first [rebooted] task force meeting
<jeff> [9]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webizen#Success_criteria
[9] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webizen#Success_criteria
jeff: at beginning of our task force mtg, we populated the wiki
... one of success criteria was don't lose money
<michiell> For me 'don't loose money' is not the main criterium
jeff: nice that you're doing this, but u could end up with
program with lots of people requiring some support
... could be it $50, $100; that's also reason for survey
... just a starting point
... so that's where we're at now
... doesn't have to be W3C creating grassroots as [brian]
mentioned in his posts
tim: q9, whether someone in affluent country supporting the
cost
... developing countries lower cost?
jeff: in prologue, we recognize there could be need for dif
levels of fees
tim: other question about students
... some can afford the fee; and the internet society?
[Coralie leaves for another meeting]
jeff: this is already a heavy weight survey
... don't want to complicate it more
brian: wish we had a more passive way to collect this
information
brian: barrier to entry to participate in the survey
michiel: i sent alternative introduction in email
<ahaller2> +1 for open end question!
michiel: we can ask some people if $100 is ok, but it's a
random statement
... someone mentioned internet society
... to have everyone pay may not be necessary
... if u price the wrong way, nobody will join
jeff: question is how do we determine what is the median of
what people would pay
... buyer wants to spend as little as possible
michiel: if they want to support the open web, what are you
willing to donate to be involved
... people donate $ because they care and want to see things
happen
jeff: we currently have the supporters program but no one is
contributing
... so I agree token is probably wrong word
... nor accessible
... what is the right word?
tim: sustainable?
brian: realistic?
jeff: how about basic fee?
<ahaller2> Armin: what about leaving the word out completely
jeff: let's go with 'basic' fee vs token
<ahaller2> ... just fee
tim: if asking what they'll pay, need to know where they're
from, and their local currency
jeff: could people type here what they'd be willing to pay for
this?
<michiell> 45 euro
<mediaprophet> $150 AUD
<mediaprophet> ~
<ahaller2> $120
<jeff> $1000
<virginie> 50 euros
<olleo> 50 euros
<bkardell_> Unanswerable, depends what it is :-)
<mediaprophet> if i was really poor - ~75 - but it’s less than
the cost of a certificate...
5,000,000 jpy
jeff: okay, interesting
tim: still important is culture
... not as commercial as other fields?
... engagement protocol sets foundation for how this happens
jeff: good point
... after the AC rejected the June proposal, I was skeptical
... how to make this to not lose money, make it acceptable to
AC
... culture is important
... winning proposal could be what's in brian's blog post
... for now, let's go ahead with the survey
<michiell> We can ask the question about money and let them
answer in local currency
<mediaprophet> is this the proposal discussed?
[10]https://medium.com/@briankardell/web-standards-we-want-part
-i-chapters-ca71985bf914
[10]
https://medium.com/@briankardell/web-standards-we-want-part-i-chapters-ca71985bf914
jeff: if this one dies then we may try a third time
tim: I think this it incredibly important work and I support
this
brian: I would like to make an observation
... perhaps a radical sugestion
... while there are lots of interesting points, whatever level
of pricing
... we don't know what this will look like
... I feel like that's one of the things AC will reject
... long survey might not get us the information
... what about couple of concrete proposals and then survey
which one on thos proposals do you like
<michiell> Two or three scenario's - which one is the webizen
you want
brian: too much choice is overwhelming
... if you tell people $100, might complain but they pay and
they'll be happy
<virginie> I feel this idea to offer 3 nice stories is a good
suggestion
brian: can we narrow it down more?
jeff: so Brian, this may surprise you
... I believe I've done this
... look at q3, I anticipate most would select 'it would
depend'
<virginie> I think that what bk is expecting is complete
package description
jeff: when we correlate the information, it will give us the
options
brian: logging into survey, there's many more questions
armin: comment on payment
... for the cost, stress that even if the program is free it
will make participation stronger
... if people are joining as indiv in free program, get more
... agree with brian's freeform survey
... get comments, ability to express opinions
jeff: agree, we should add question at end for their own
perspective on this program
... ideas you may have
virginie: wanted to highlight brian's suggestion
... could be complementary to survey
... could be additional question
... which one of 3 options would you prefer
... could be redundant but could be interesting
... maybe classifying 3 scenarios
... e.g.25 equival dollars, u get ...
<michiell> And you can actually implement more than one in the
end
virginie: happy to work on some words for these scenarios
jeff: sure, but I don't know if we'll get consensus of the
right scenarios quickly
tim: who cares about the merchandising?
<michiell> I don't think there is a W3C shop?
tim: are people going to join just to be part of W3C versus
joining for merchandise
... social media, at the moment, there are 125 followers
... gauge how many people are attaching to the concept?
... 120 followers on twitter tag
jeff: I don't know what people are going to be interested in
... I'd rather ask them rather than assume
tim: who's working on promotion on twitter?
jeff: Coralie is handling this. contact her.
michiel: i think merchandise important; why not separate this
... a merchandise shop
jeff: might be possible
michiell: some people want to be involved, some just want
merchandise
jeff: thanks everyone for input. some changes may be small but
are important
... translating is huge idea and will take a little time
... I'll schedule call week of 29 Sep
... by then we'll see results
... based on partic and results, we'll see if we have a program
of if we're back to square 1
... please tell everyone to answer the survey!
<virginie> thanks !
jeff: thanks everyone for your participation today!
<ahaller2> bye
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Coralie to get survey, once final, translated in
W3C Offices languages [recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/05-webizen-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [12]scribe.perl version
1.138 ([13]CVS log)
$Date: 2014-09-05 18:46:35 $
[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, 5 September 2014 18:50:39 UTC