W3C WBS Home

Results of Questionnaire Determining which Community and Business Groups should transition to Working Group

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email address: team-community-process@w3.org

This questionnaire was open from 2013-04-10 to 2013-05-15.

35 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Your Community Group or Business Group
  2. State of your Community Group or Business Group
  3. Goal of your Community Group or Business Group
  4. Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group
  5. No transition to a Working Group
  6. Open comments

1. Your Community Group or Business Group

Please, name the Community Group or Business Group for which you are submitting answers.

Details

Responder Name of your Community Group or Business Group
Coralie Mercier Community Council
Mohamed ZERGAOUI Change Tracking Community Group
Roger Cutler Oil, Gas and Chemicals Community Group
Manu Sporny Web Payments
Annette Greiner High-Performance Computing
Richard Wallis Schema Bib Extend
Renato Iannella ODRL Community Group
Wendy Seltzer Restricted Media CG
Andrew Cooke Livestock Data Interchange Standards Community Group
Russell Potter Cloud Computing Community Group
Adam Sobieski Argumentation Community Group
Robert Sanderson Open Annotation Community Group
Paola Di Maio Semantic Web Interfaces SWI
Florian Daniel Interactive APIs Community Group
Tony Graham Print and Page Layout Community Group
Eric Meyer CSS Selector Fragments
David De Roure Web Observatory Community Group
Paolo Ciccarese Open Annotation
Martín Álvarez Open Data Spain Community Group
Anas R. HTML5 Specifications Community Group
Michiel de Jong unhosted
Alexandre Morgaut Client and Server JavaScript APIs
Andrea Perego Locations and Addresses
Melvin Carvalho Read Write Web Community Group
Rob Manson Augmented Reality (Augmented Web)
David Singer web media text tracks
Uche Ogbuji MicroXML Community Group
Glen Shires Speech API
Florent Georges EXPath
Charles McCathie Nevile W3C process
Mike Taylor Script Library Community Group
Jonathan Corson-Rikert VIVO Open Research Networking Community Group
Alejandra Garcia Rojas Geospatial Semantic Web
Marcos Caceres Responsive Images Community Group
Philipp Cimiano Ontology-Lexica Community Group

2. State of your Community Group or Business Group

Is your Community Group or Business Group:

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Active and ongoing and nearing completion 9
Inactive because it has completed its work 1
Active and ongoing and far from completion 20
Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum 4

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder State of your Community Group or Business Group
Coralie Mercier Active and ongoing and far from completion
Mohamed ZERGAOUI Active and ongoing and far from completion
Roger Cutler Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum
Manu Sporny Active and ongoing and far from completion
Annette Greiner Active and ongoing and far from completion
Richard Wallis Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Renato Iannella Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Wendy Seltzer Active and ongoing and far from completion
Andrew Cooke Active and ongoing and far from completion
Russell Potter Inactive because it has completed its work
Adam Sobieski Active and ongoing and far from completion
Robert Sanderson Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Paola Di Maio Active and ongoing and far from completion
Florian Daniel Active and ongoing and far from completion
Tony Graham Active and ongoing and far from completion
Eric Meyer Active and ongoing and far from completion
David De Roure Active and ongoing and far from completion
Paolo Ciccarese Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Martín Álvarez Active and ongoing and far from completion
Anas R. Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum
Michiel de Jong Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Alexandre Morgaut Active and ongoing and far from completion
Andrea Perego Active and ongoing and far from completion
Melvin Carvalho Active and ongoing and far from completion
Rob Manson Active and ongoing and far from completion
David Singer Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Uche Ogbuji Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Glen Shires Active and ongoing and nearing completion
Florent Georges Active and ongoing and far from completion
Charles McCathie Nevile
Mike Taylor Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum
Jonathan Corson-Rikert Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum
Alejandra Garcia Rojas Active and ongoing and far from completion
Marcos Caceres Active and ongoing and far from completion
Philipp Cimiano Active and ongoing and nearing completion

3. Goal of your Community Group or Business Group

Is the goal of your Community Group or Business Group:

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
To provide a specification 18
To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere 10
Other (please specify) 7

Details

Responder Goal of your Community Group or Business GroupYou checked "other", please specify
Coralie Mercier To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Mohamed ZERGAOUI To provide a specification
Roger Cutler To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere There is a proposal still on the table to try to advance to the W3C a spec involved with a Web Service interface into either SKOS or OWL (unclear at present exactly which - maybe both with limited scope to OWL), but this is on hold because the key players are not currently available.
Manu Sporny To provide a specification
Annette Greiner To provide a specification
Richard Wallis To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Renato Iannella To provide a specification
Wendy Seltzer To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Andrew Cooke To provide a specification
Russell Potter To provide a specification
Adam Sobieski To provide a specification
Robert Sanderson To provide a specification
Paola Di Maio Other (please specify) To provide guidelines and recommendations, that could possible serve as the basis of a specification at a future date
Florian Daniel To provide a specification
Tony Graham To provide a specification
Eric Meyer To provide a specification
David De Roure To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Paolo Ciccarese Other (please specify) We provided a first Specification document already. We are now thinking of supporting more use cases and other aspects such as a communication protocol.
Martín Álvarez To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Anas R. To provide a specification
Michiel de Jong To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Alexandre Morgaut Other (please specify) The goals are:
- "To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere"
- and to potentially end up with a dedicated W3C Working Group to provide server specific specifications
Andrea Perego To provide a specification
Melvin Carvalho Other (please specify) Mainly discussion but incubation of specs is also in scope
Rob Manson To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
David Singer To provide a specification
Uche Ogbuji To provide a specification
Glen Shires Other (please specify) We are in the process of learning from implementations and acceptance within the Web developer community -- both from browser vendors implementing the spec, and from authors of web applications applying the spec on real web sites. The CG facilitates discussion of implementation issues, test suites and errata.
Florent Georges To provide a specification
Charles McCathie Nevile To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere Not sure if it is inactive because it doesn't have momentum, or inactive because there is no visible work on the specs we are meant to work on. The group provides input on Process (and potentially Patent Policy).

And I suspect I will start to poke at the ashes and see if it flares up soon.
Mike Taylor Other (please specify) I believe it was created as a forum for JS lib authors to discuss standards (but I didn't create it myself). As you can see from the mail archives, none of that happened.
Jonathan Corson-Rikert Other (please specify) A discussion forum around tools, ontologies, community interests, not leading toward a specification.
Alejandra Garcia Rojas To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere
Marcos Caceres To provide a specification
Philipp Cimiano To provide a specification In particular, the goal is to produce a vocabulary.

4. Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group

What are your specification transition plans?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
We have already handed off all or part of a specification to a Working Group. 1
We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working Group within six months. 3
We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so. 9
We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question). 11

(11 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group
Coralie Mercier
Mohamed ZERGAOUI We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Roger Cutler
Manu Sporny We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Annette Greiner We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Richard Wallis
Renato Iannella We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Wendy Seltzer
Andrew Cooke We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Russell Potter We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working Group within six months.
Adam Sobieski We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working Group within six months.
Robert Sanderson We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Paola Di Maio We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Florian Daniel We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Tony Graham We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Eric Meyer We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
David De Roure
Paolo Ciccarese We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Martín Álvarez
Anas R. We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Michiel de Jong We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Alexandre Morgaut We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Andrea Perego We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Melvin Carvalho We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).
Rob Manson
David Singer We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working Group within six months.
Uche Ogbuji We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Glen Shires We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Florent Georges We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so.
Charles McCathie Nevile
Mike Taylor
Jonathan Corson-Rikert
Alejandra Garcia Rojas
Marcos Caceres We have already handed off all or part of a specification to a Working Group.
Philipp Cimiano We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question).

5. No transition to a Working Group

summary | by responder | by choice

We do not expect to transition to a Working Group for the following reasons (check all that apply):

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet. 12
Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform. 2
A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy. 3
We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group patent commitments. 2
Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group. 3
Other (please specify). 5

(8 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder No transition to a Working GroupYou checked "other", please specify
Coralie Mercier
Mohamed ZERGAOUI
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Roger Cutler
Manu Sporny
Annette Greiner
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Richard Wallis
  • Other (please specify).
The purpose of the group is form consensus from a focussed group around recommendations to another group (public-vocabs) for extensions to their generic specifications.
Renato Iannella
Wendy Seltzer
Andrew Cooke
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform.
  • We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group patent commitments.
  • Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group.
Russell Potter
Adam Sobieski
Robert Sanderson
Paola Di Maio
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • Other (please specify).
this is exploratory activity at this stage
Florian Daniel
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Tony Graham
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Eric Meyer
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
David De Roure
Paolo Ciccarese
Martín Álvarez
Anas R.
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform.
  • A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy.
  • We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group patent commitments.
  • Other (please specify).
I'm not Members of W3C yet.
Michiel de Jong
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy.
  • Other (please specify).
we actually use https://groups.google.com/forum#!forum/unhosted as our main forum, https://ietf.org/id/draft-dejong-remotestorage-00.txt for our spec, and github for code, and this is good enough.
Alexandre Morgaut
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group.
Andrea Perego
Melvin Carvalho
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Rob Manson
David Singer
Uche Ogbuji
Glen Shires
Florent Georges
Charles McCathie Nevile
Mike Taylor
  • Other (please specify).
It seems like this CG is a ghost town.
Jonathan Corson-Rikert
Alejandra Garcia Rojas
Marcos Caceres
  • Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
Philipp Cimiano
  • A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy.
  • Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet.
  • Mohamed ZERGAOUI
  • Annette Greiner
  • Andrew Cooke
  • Paola Di Maio
  • Florian Daniel
  • Tony Graham
  • Eric Meyer
  • Anas R.
  • Michiel de Jong
  • Alexandre Morgaut
  • Melvin Carvalho
  • Marcos Caceres
Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform.
  • Andrew Cooke
  • Anas R.
A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy.
  • Anas R.
  • Michiel de Jong
  • Philipp Cimiano
We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group patent commitments.
  • Andrew Cooke
  • Anas R.
Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group.
  • Andrew Cooke
  • Alexandre Morgaut
  • Philipp Cimiano
Other (please specify).
  • Richard Wallis
  • Paola Di Maio
  • Anas R.
  • Michiel de Jong
  • Mike Taylor

6. Open comments

Please, let us us know of anything you feel is relevant to complete your answers.

Details

Responder Open comments
Coralie Mercier
Mohamed ZERGAOUI
Roger Cutler The group is not completely dead but it's not real lively either. Sort of a potential zombie at the moment, perhaps.
Manu Sporny The simultaneous running of the "Web Payments (Headlights)" initiative and the "Web Payments Community Group" (running for much longer than the headlights exercise) is confusing people. In the future, when creating headlights groups, please don't name them the same as an already active group. I've spent multiple calls with journalists and developers trying to explain to them what the difference between the Headlights Web Payments exercise and the Web Payments Community group is.

It would have been good of W3C to coordinate with the Web Payments CG before launching the Web Payments Headlights exercise. The amount of non-coordination of the Web Payments Headlights initiative with the Web Payments CG is worrying, it gives the impression that there are two completely different initiatives at W3C around payments.
Annette Greiner
Richard Wallis
Renato Iannella To clarify Q6 - We believe that our specs are gaining serious uptake in the community and would be an significant addition to the W3C TR family
Wendy Seltzer
Andrew Cooke
Russell Potter
Adam Sobieski
Robert Sanderson We are looking for guidance for if, when and how to transition to a Working Group.
Paola Di Maio please bear with us
Florian Daniel
Tony Graham
Eric Meyer
David De Roure The likely outputs of the group in its first phase will be catalogues and/or guidelines, which will refer to other specifications. This may change later, but for clarity of mission I am setting the group up so that we have an agreed point where we review its purpose - we could in principle then choose to produce a specification.
Paolo Ciccarese We are still not sure if it is possible and we would like to transition to a Working Group.
Martín Álvarez This group is using and implementing specifications made by other W3C groups. No need of transition to WG.
Anas R.
Michiel de Jong
Alexandre Morgaut
Andrea Perego
Melvin Carvalho
Rob Manson Once the MediaStreams (gUM), Web Audio and WebRTC standards stabilise and become more widely available in browsers there will be a significant increase in our activity as people really start using the Augmented Web in production applications.
David Singer under discussion with Philippe, and other chairs
Uche Ogbuji The group successfully drafted a spec during a period of heavy activity a few months ago, and there has been a lull in discussion since then as folks work on implementations. We've had the idea of transitioning to XML Core WG come up, and I think the consensus would support this, but we have not made definitive plans to do so.
Glen Shires After gathering sufficient feedback (see question 4), our transition strategy is for the specification to become part of future HTML and/or WebApps work. It's a core part of the WebPlatform that needs to be developed within a working group that has significant cross-domain expertise spanning WebApps, HTML, and Speech.
Florent Georges
Charles McCathie Nevile The questionnaire said I could re-open it, so I did. Sorry, I ended up a bit busy at the end of April.
Mike Taylor
Jonathan Corson-Rikert Has been an ongoing challenge for people wanting to join to get past all the disclaimers and signoffs stating that one's employer has approved participation. Perhaps this is just not the place for discussions, in which case it makes sense to declare it an area for discussions that are likely to lead to specifications and/or a working group.
Alejandra Garcia Rojas
Marcos Caceres
Philipp Cimiano We discussed with Ivan Hermann who recommended to produce a vocabulary and host it under W3C Vocab.

More details on responses


Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire


Maintained by Laurent Carcone, from a development by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org) on an original design by Michael Sperberg-McQueen $Id: showv.php3,v 1.127 2015-02-04 08:52:34 carcone Exp $. Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to lcarcone@w3.org with w3t-sys@w3.org copied (if your mail client supports it, send mail directly to the right persons)