Re: Removing WebVR from W3C

We're working out what's going on with the charter. It wasn't something the
community group agreed to.

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:14 PM Leonard Daly <web3d@realism.com> wrote:

> Well someone has proposed a charter. It's at
> https://www.w3.org/2017/07/vr-wg-charter.html. The mission of the WebVR
> WG is "to help bring high-performance Virtual Reality (VR) to the open Web
> via an API to interact with virtual reality devices in browsers." The
> expected completion is 3Q2018. The first teleconference is Sep, with the
> first F2F scheduled for November.
>
> Does anyone know who submitted the charter? Khronos is mentioned in the
> "External Organizations" section.
>
>
> Leonard Daly
>
>
>
>
> Dominique is well meaning, but as far as I'm aware no members of the
> community group have stated that we want to move forward with formalizing
> as a W3C working group.
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:11 AM Leonard Daly <web3d@realism.com> wrote:
>
>> Brandon,
>>
>> About 3 hours before you posted this, I got a message from Dominique
>> Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> <dom@w3.org> [Subject: WebVR Working Group
>> charter under W3C AC review] through this list stating that a proposed
>> WebVR working group charter was submitted today. [
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2017Jul/0002.html].
>> Review date cutoff is 18 August.
>>
>> That action by the W3C seems to directly contradict your second sentence.
>> Please comment.
>>
>> Leonard Daly
>>
>>
>> WebVR is currently hosted as a W3C community group. Despite the name that
>> does not imply that WebVR must become a W3C working group. We could still
>> go off and become a Khronos standard if we deemed that to be appropriate
>> and Khronos wanted to have us, for example. But that ignores the basic fact
>> that we're generally not interested in officially joining a standards group
>> just yet. We'd prefer to finish getting some of the basics locked down
>> while we can be a bit more casual and fluid before settling down into a
>> more rigorous process.
>>
>> We'll weigh the pros and cons of the various standards bodies when we're
>> at a point that we're ready to join one.
>>
>> --Brandon
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:31 AM David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > On Jul 11, 2017, at 9:25 , Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I would like to express my vote of no confidence against the W3C. I
>>> believe the organization is inherently biased towards pushing DRM (for
>>> whatever reason I don't care to speculate). I think the W3C has become an
>>> inappropriate place to host a standard such as WebVR. The DRM discussion is
>>> highly contentious and unproductive and distracts from the real challenges
>>> of WebVR. It is my desire to see this standard hosted by a truly impartial
>>> body.
>>>
>>> One person has asked one question on this list about whether WebVR and
>>> protected media might work together, and from this you conclude inherent
>>> bias?
>>>
>>> I cannot agree with you more on this, though: "The DRM discussion is
>>> highly contentious and unproductive”.
>>>
>>> "Truly impartial" means that we don’t refuse to discuss technical
>>> matters that people want to discuss, by the way.
>>>
>>>
>>> David Singer
>>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> *Leonard Daly*
>> 3D Systems Architect & Cloud Consultant
>> President, Daly Realism - *Creating the Future*
>>
>
> --
> *Leonard Daly*
> 3D Systems Architect & Cloud Consultant
> President, Daly Realism - *Creating the Future*
>