Re: Setting TAG Priorities - Next steps

On 2009-03 -22, at 11:10, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:

> TAG members:
>
> In an email just sent [1], I summarized the work we've done so far  
> toward
> setting the TAG's long term agenda.  We have a F2F scheduled  
> tentatively
> for end of June:  if we can make good progress refining our priorities
> between now and then, we'll have a much more effective F2F agenda, and
> there will be less need to spend time discussing priorities.  So,  
> here are
> my thoughts on next steps, along with a request for you to help move  
> this
> discussion forward in the coming weeks:
>
> First, it's clear that there is a balance to be struck between top  
> down
> planning driven by unifying themes as identified at the F2F [2] vs.
> stepping in quickly and effectively on other high priority matters  
> that
> need attention.  I don't think we yet know what the right balance is.
> Also, we haven't >yet< shown that we can use the themes we gathered  
> at the
> F2F to motivate specific work items with clear goals and measures of
> success.  Even if the themes do prove effective, we'll need to be  
> nimble
> about taking up other high priority work from time to time.  So, we  
> need
> to propose more specific activities under each theme, and to  
> prioritize
> both the big themes and the specific activities.
>
> Let's try in email in the coming weeks to make progress, building on  
> what
> we did at the F2F.  There are multiple threads we'll need to pursue in
> parallel, iterating until we have a set of particular deliverables
> organized by high priority themes, or else perhaps until the point  
> where
> we decide that themes aren't serving us after all.  Below my  
> signature are
> a set of questions I think we should be discussing between now and the
> F2F.
>
> I propose that we let this discussion go on as a background activity  
> for a
> few weeks to see whether it proves fruitful.  In the meantime, we have
> quite a few items left over from last week's agenda, as well as one  
> or two
> new ones, and they look worthwhile to me.  I'll be scheduling those  
> for
> telcons on the 26th and the 2nd, while keeping an eye on this  
> discussion
> of long term priorities.  Thank you.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Noah
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Mar/0138.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/05-whiteboard-priorities.txt
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2009/03/03-TAG-issue-status.html
>
>
> SUGGESTED TOPICS FOR EMAIL DISCUSSION
> -------------------------------------
>
> *       Of the 6 themes identified [2] at the F2F, and of the  
> particular
> items listed under them, help us set priorities.  Should we focus on  
> all 6
> equally?  Are the themes in fact useful in setting priorities?

My suggestion is that we focus on 4

- HTML TAG soup and versioning
	Maybe new note to tell the story of how this works in HML5 using  
ultra-liberal parsing?
	(Separately get JAR's node on versioning in general out -- useful  
IMHO but not for HTML5)

- Access to metadata
	This is timely.  We should make a finding which could be a part of a  
new Arch Doc which
	described how to get metadata using link headers etc. And we should  
review the 3 drafts Noah points to.

- Naming
	Get this finding done and wrapped up and off the agenda.

- Semantic web a la awwsw

We track two:

- Security, which we feel is important but do not have in-group  
expertise really.

- Mobile, looking or issues in mobile which are different from normal  
web arch.

Tim