IG Timeline and Moderation

Overall, the charter looks good to me.

Having well-defined and categorized use cases is important. After the Paris
workshop it is also clear that we need more discussion of requirements and
where standards are needed or where they could actually hamper innovations.

The two parts of the charter that worried me a bit were the timeline and
the group structure/moderation, or lack thereof.

   - *Timeline - *the timeline section is vague almost to the point of
   being meaningless. It would be helpful to have a more specific expectation
   of when the group should produce at least some initial findings. I would be
   less worried about capturing every single use case than about getting too
   hung up in the problem definitions. Additional use cases and requirements
   will surely arise during the standards process so it would be ideal for
   this initial phase to move as quickly as possible. In addition, the Web
   Payments CG has already done an incredible amount of work outlining and
   categorizing use cases and requirements. It would behoove the IG to use the
   CG's work as a starting point instead of rehashing the same conversations
   that the CG has already gone through.
   - *Structure and moderation - *having a group chair/moderator has been
   incredibly helpful with moving the CG proceedings along, will there be a
   chair of the IG to organize and facilitate discussions and document
   drafting processes? For what it's worth, I'll add that I think Manu Sporny
   has done an excellent job moving the CG along and has demonstrated an
   incredible level of commitment to the Web Payments standards process.


-- 
Evan Schwartz
Developer + Technology Pioneer
Ripple Labs Inc.