Re: Feedback sought on reorganizing the list of W3C Technical Reports

Hi Dom,

this was discussed in the Dataset Exchange Working Group. See
the minutes at:
 https://www.w3.org/2021/01/12-dxwg-minutes.html#t03

Philippe

On 1/11/2021 6:55 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As part of the Web site redesign, Denis, Vivien and I have been looking
> at some of the approaches we could take to make the TR page easier to
> consume - with a goal of bring this  as input to the redesign Studio 24
> is going to bring to the page as part of the overall site redesign. This
> message concludes with a short-term request for feedback .
> 
> Part of the challenge with the TR page is that we have over 1200
> technical reports on the page, which makes it hard to organize and make
> sense of.
> 
> Denis and I have been exploring the idea of bringing more structure to
> the list by recognizing that a significant number of individual
> documents can be grouped into more meaningful sets, along two main axes:
> * specification series (level 1, 2, ...)
> * specification "families" where a given "technology" is split in
> different documents (e.g. XQuery & XSLT, OWL, RDF)
> 
> (in many cases, these "families" can be manually inferred from use of
> common shortname prefixes, or common title subsets - moving forward, we
> would want to put in place a more systematic approach to defining and
> tracking these families)
> 
> When using this approach, and ignoring obsolete technical reports (those
> currently advertised as "retired" on the TR page), a first stab at this
> grouping produces ~ 280 entries (to be compared to the 1200+ full
> list or TR ) which sounds like it should be easier to grasp, and in
> general, help bring sense to our past and ongoing work.
> 
> The said grouping is described in
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WlqmB1ZTUo-nqpZ-E_bMUHD_KCcHUC10c2uctsj9Cv0/edit#gid=0
> (exported as attached CSV as well) - this is based on TR data obtained
> on Dec 17.
> 
> Denis and I have been working on a wireframe-mockup of how a TR page
> reorganized along these lines would look like:
> 
> https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/tr-pages/family-grouping/family-mockup/status.html
> 
> There is naturally a lot of improvements that needs to be brought to
> that design, but we thought it would help get a sense of what these
> families would enable.
> 
> We're primarily (and most urgently) interested in feedback from groups
> and spec authors on whether this is a reasonable way to organize the TR
> page moving forward. Given the timeline constraints of the redesign
> project, it would be great to get such *feedback before next Monday (Jan
> 18, 2021)*.
> 
> We're also interested in suggestions on how to improve the specific
> classification of specs proposed in the spreadsheet (ideally, towards
> reducing the number of families), but we have a lot more time for that
> work, on which we expect we would iterate on a more relaxed basis if
> this is indeed a viable way forward.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dom
>

Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2021 21:41:03 UTC