Re: moving to Community Group?

To clarify,

   Community Groups are non-standard tracks for experimental work that 
*may* lead to W3C Recommendation work, and the lightweight 
specification-specific IPR agreement.

   I agree that we should transition to a Community Group as the process 
is simply easier for people to join than the currrent XG process. We 
have not yet had a full XG transition to a Community Group. However, it 
sounds like it's time for us! I'll bring this up with Systems Team and 
start getting the transition going.

   As soon was get som news back from the TPAC organizing committee on 
whether or not we have space for a Silicon Valley meeting, we'll 
organize another telecon to discuss the

1) Transition to a community group
2) OMA work on social web
3) Silicon Valley meeting

      cheers,
          harry


On 08/26/2011 06:25 PM, 전종홍 wrote:
> Hi, Dan.
>
> Thanks for your explanations.
> It would be helpful for me to understand the W3C's changed policy and intentions.
>
> However, there are still remains misunderstandable points.
> Currently, the community group looks like non-standard track or informal track.
> It seems like the goal of community group is just to encourage community participation.
>
> I think W3C staff need to clarify at this point
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --- Jonathan Jeon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xg-federatedsocialweb-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-federatedsocialweb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dan Brickley
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 11:52 PM
> To: public-xg-federatedsocialweb
> Subject: Re: moving to Community Group?
>
>
> On 26 August 2011 16:09, Dan Brickley<danbri@danbri.org>  wrote:
>> On 26 August 2011 15:32, 전종홍<hollobit@etri.re.kr>  wrote:
>>> Are there proposed group related FSW ?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure that new community group would be suitable than FSW XG.
>>>
>>> Current Community Groups: http://www.w3.org/community/groups/
>>> Proposed Groups : http://www.w3.org/community/groups/proposed/
>>> Comparisons of Group Types : http://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/compare/
>> As you say, the current "Incubator Group" is just fine. However my
>> understanding is that W3C expects community groups to eventually
>> replace the Incubator mechanism. So in a few years, there will only be
>> Community Groups, not CGs + XGs. Whether current incubators want to,
>> or need to, transition is a separate question, I believe. Incubator
>> groups have short-term charters.
> A couple more points. I checked with Ian Jacobs at W3C. As a group
> transitioning from the Incubator activity, we could keep using the
> teleconference bridge, and also this email list. So no need to
> re-subscribe everyone to a new CG list. So that all seems good so far.
>
> Dan
>

Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 23:16:34 UTC