Re: W3C Community Group

The response to your question is in the "to" header of your mail ; there is a mailing list for the datapipelining group, but you've used the xproc-dev list...;)
Christophe

Nic Gibson <nicg@corbas.co.uk> wrote:Hi Christophe
I’m aware of that - Norm and the committee asked Ari and I to consider the future of the community group and what it should do. Hence the email
nic

On 7 March 2017 at 08:18:23, Christophe Marchand (christophe.marchand@contactoffice.net) wrote:There is an active group who decided in Prague 2017 to work on XProc 3.0. This group is about 12 people who are really concerned by XProc, and are active. The Prague session ended on defining goals and responsabilities.If we look at the "Datapipelining Community Group" members, only 4 of them are active in the XProc 3 group ; we have never seen others, except we had a skype talk with you during Prague session.
So, datapipelining community group does nothing, the members - except 4 of them - are not active, and there is no reason to keep this group, or keep thinking it is related to XProc (that was the purpose of the CG at the beginning).
But, I think the XProc 3.0 group **must** work under W3C authority, as XProc was a W3C Working Group, and as we work on language evolutions. Should it be a community group, a working group, or anything else, I do not know enough on W3C groups organizations and responsabilities, so I do not have an opinion. But, as nobody (except Norm) in group is a W3C member, it'll be difficult to build a working group.
I've been volunteer to work on XProc documentation. In my message on this list, the feb, 14th, I explain I'm on reviewing the existing documentation, to produce an updated, useful, educational documentation. The WHERE has not been yet discussed, but the goal is actually to have a central source for documentation, tutorials, FAQ, CookBook, and whatever uesful.
I actually think we must work under W3C authority. We met Bernard Gidon (bgidon@w3.org) & Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) last week, and they encourage us to join W3 to work on normalization, "as (we) do on XProc" (tr. FR).
@Liam, your opinion ?
Best,Christophe

Nic Gibson <nicg@corbas.co.uk> wrote:Hi all
As some people are aware, there is a W3C Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/datapipelining/) related to XProc that has been effectively moribund due to Ari and myself not being terribly full of free time and our lack of a particular vision for the group.
A week or two ago Ari and I met up to discuss this* and we came up with a few ideas. We are taking the fact that there is no longer a formal working group as the basis of our thought processes.

So, we’d like feedback on the following thoughts
1) Could the community group be used to organise the ‘home’ of XProc online? Currently, there isxproc.org, exproc.org, the w3c site, Gerrit’s site, github and probably some other sites2) Could we merge some of the online tutorials and host them on the community group wiki?3) We wonder if it would be a good place to gather uses cases and feature requests (for the language itself, not the implementations). 

Finally, should the group actually exist? I’m not convinced either way. It *does* need to be renamed if it continues to exist. Data Pipelining Uses Cases doesn’t exactly slip off of the tongue.

nic

* and, unfortunately, to get Ari’s phone stolen.