- From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 21:04:50 +0200
- To: Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: Web Payments <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On 2014-05-18 18:09, Stephane Boyera wrote: > My apologies for joining late this discussion but i was traveling. > > I believe I need to bring some clarity on some of the points that were > brought in this discussion. > yes W3C develops open and patent-free standards. The development of > standards is done in an open way and involve public feedback at > different points in the process, see > http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html/ > In particular, the stage called "Last Call" requires all comments > received by the working group (WG) to be addressed, responded and agreed > by the commenter. So i believe we can safely say that the development of > specifications at W3C is open and transparent. > However, there is a big difference between having a WG (or a IG) > requesting regularly the feedback of the public, and having a WG working > in public. Usually feedback is requested on documents that represent > consensus within the WG. While working in public requires that each > member exposes its own view in public. > I'm all in favor of working in public. More than just transparency, it > is usually easier to manage feedback from external parties. People can > see e.G. why specific design were ruled out, how consensus was developed > etc. > For that reason i put in the draft charter the proposal to have the > group working in public. > However, there are also a number of groups at W3C not working in public. > There all kind of reasons for that. Some organizations are not willing > to expose their opinions in public but are happy to participate in the > consensus building. Sometimes it is just a matter of communication > policy, where organizations send people that are not allowed to speak in > public. Again there might be many reasons. > Here we are in the process of bringing a new community on board. We must > understand what is acceptable and what is not for the members of this > community. I'm here to learn. That's why, while proposing to work in > public, i'm also willing to get feedback whether this is an issue for > some members of this community or not. > If it is not an issue, then fine. if it is an issue then we will see > what to do. But it is essential to let all organizations know that this > option is on the table and the charter development CG is here to build > consensus on how we will work in the future. > I hope this clarify a bit the discussion? Well, the traditional payment industry have never run anything in public forums, that's for sure. The same is applicable to the industry working with hardware cryptography which is one reason Google had to take U2F to another SDO. Anders > > Steph > Le 15/05/2014 23:58, Melvin Carvalho a écrit : >> >> >> >> On 15 May 2014 23:50, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com >> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote: >> >> On 05/15/2014 01:34 PM, Steven Rowat wrote: >> > On 2014-05-15, at 6:28 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com >> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> >> > wrote: >> >> The option to run the payments work in a closed group, except for >> >> the publication of drafts, is now on the table. This is concerning >> > >> > +1 Where is this proposal made? I can't see it in the links you sent. >> > The IG is so far listed as Public. ? >> >> """ >> I would be happy to know if the payment industry is more likely going to >> be interested in working in public or internally as a closed group and >> query the community on regular basis through the publication of draft >> documents. >> """ >> >> In the last bullet item in the list here: >> >> http://www.w3.org/community/webpaymentsigcharter/2014/05/15/first-draft-of-future-web-payments-interest-group-charter-published/ >> >> > But IMO It already looks from the proposed Charter that the various >> > forms and arms of the existing financial services industry are being >> > overly recognized and served by the IG, with 'users' tacked on at >> > the end as sort of an afterthought, as if a revolution in the way >> > finances are carried on isn't going to happen. That may be true, but >> > it may not. >> >> Part of this could be fueled by the W3C wanting to attract as many new >> members as it can into the work. Keep in mind that W3C is going to have >> to bring on a couple of big members if this work is going to proceed. >> They need these new members because 1) there is a lot of work to be >> done, and W3C needs the money to accomplish that new work, and 2) we >> need to make sure that we have solid representation from the payment >> industry and that they're interested in implementing this stuff that >> we're proposing. If the option is not getting them onboard and not >> starting the work vs. getting them on board and running the work in a >> closed fashion, then that's going to be a hard decision to make for W3C. >> >> That said, I think it would be a disaster for W3C to run the official >> work behind closed doors. There should be enough organizations that want >> to run this work the way W3C runs most all of its other work; in full >> view of the public. >> >> >> W3C is a member of openstand: >> >> http://open-stand.org/principles/ >> >> [[ >> >> _*Transparency.*_ Standards organizations provide advance public notice >> of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be >> undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records >> of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are >> provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards >> approval and adoption. >> >> ... >> >> _*Openness.*_ Standards processes are open to all interested and >> informed parties. >> >> ]] >> >> While some work may be done in private, I presume anything related to >> *standards* would be made public? >> >> >> -- manu >> >> -- >> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) >> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments >> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/ >> >> >
Received on Sunday, 18 May 2014 19:05:28 UTC