- From: Charles F Wiecha <wiecha@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:17:14 -0500
- To: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
- Cc: public-xg-app-backplane <public-xg-app-backplane@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF7199C051.B638A144-ON85257521.0053E7F1-85257521.0053E400@us.ibm.com>
Jack -- thanks for your feedback...this is exactly the debate I'm hoping we can have! Ideally we'd do both the paper and the app(s), but we need to discuss who we're trying to impact and then the "how" will flow from that...Charlie Charles Wiecha Manager, Multichannel Web Interaction IBM T.J. Watson Research Center P.O. Box 704 Yorktown Heights, N.Y. 10598 Phone: (914) 784-6180, T/L 863-6180, Cell: (914) 320-2614 wiecha@us.ibm.com From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl> To: Charles F Wiecha/Watson/IBM@IBMUS Cc: public-xg-app-backplane <public-xg-app-backplane@w3.org> Date: 12/16/2008 10:13 AM Subject: Re: Agenda for Backplane XG telecon, Dec 16 On 15 dec 2008, at 21:39, Charles F Wiecha wrote: > AGENDA > > 1. Discuss whether to produce an XG report at the close of our first > year (i.e. roughly by the end of February), draft outline at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-app-backplane/2008Dec/0004.html > > 2. Alternative would be to request an extension into the second year > with the goal of producing one or more complete example > applications, showing both data and visually rich user interactions > before doing our final report. > > If you're not able to make the telecon, please weigh in on the above > question and forward comments on the draft agenda. > I'm going to try to be on the teleconf, but let me share my thoughts on the draft vs. extension question beforehand (and in case I don't manage to make the teleconf, busybusybusy.....). I'm not really sure whether we should aim at producing a report or an application, and the main reason why I'm not sure is that I don't really know who our target audience is. I think that what we really want, on a more abstract level, is to create enthusiasm for the idea of rich web apps, and demonstrate that there's nothing magic about them, and a lot of the technology is already available. I think that knowing our target audience is important, because it should influence what we produce. If we produce the wrong thing than we may miss our abstract goal. As an example: the outline that Charlie provided for the report is something that I feel would be aimed more at managerial/strategic readers than at technology oriented people like myself. But a demonstrator would probably have exactly the opposite effect: it may work well for people who are used to ingesting ideas based on an "aha!" experience and then filling in the details with further reading, but miss the more formal side. Discussed this with my colleague Pablo Cesar just now, and he suggested looking at the deliverables of some other XGs, such as Multimedia Semantics (which has since then evolved into the Media Annotations Working Group). Maybe a split into multiple documents is a good idea, although I'm not exactly sure how the split should be done... -- Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
- image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 15:17:57 UTC