14:58:27 RRSAgent has joined #newstd 14:58:27 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/09/03-newstd-irc 14:58:44 zakim, room for 12 at 11:00 for 90 minutes? 14:58:46 ok, Ian; conference Team_(newstd)15:00Z scheduled with code 63978 (NEWST) at 11:00 for 90 minutes until 1630Z 15:00:40 Arnaud has joined #newstd 15:01:39 Team_(newstd)15:00Z has now started 15:01:45 +Ian 15:01:54 +Arnaud_LeHors 15:02:39 zakim, who's here? 15:02:39 On the phone I see Ian, Arnaud_LeHors 15:02:41 On IRC I see Arnaud, RRSAgent, Zakim, tlr, karl, Ian, dom, trackbot 15:03:06 +Mike_Champion 15:03:54 agenda+ IPR notes 15:03:59 agenda+ dev portal 15:04:04 agenda+ infrastructure 15:04:55 +??P21 15:05:06 zakim, ??21 is me 15:05:06 sorry, dom, I do not recognize a party named '??21' 15:05:13 zakim, ??P21 is me 15:05:13 +dom; got it 15:05:44 topic: Where we are 15:05:53 - proposals need to be solid by 20 sep 15:07:20 If you want to reread and point out holes/weaknesses, please do 15:07:23 topic: IPR bits 15:07:36 http://www.w3.org/2010/07/community#ipr 15:08:56 IJ: intends to work on editing the "requirements" section. 15:17:14 +Larry_Rosen 15:17:26 http://www.w3.org/2010/07/community#ipr 15:18:30 lrosen has joined #newstd 15:20:58 Mike: too complicated 15:21:08 mike: the use case of people walking away...is the source of a lot of the complexity 15:21:29 ...the advantage of the owa model is that the community does what it does and patent lawyers look at it at the end. 15:21:45 ...sure there's the submarine situation, but life is like that. 15:22:08 Arnaud: Do we have examples of specs that have been fully completed (e.g., under OWFa) where people's organizations have signed up at the end? 15:22:22 Larry: Yes, there's a list of those at the owf web site (companies who've made such commitments) 15:23:28 Larry: THere is a patent commitment that becomes irrecovable after 45 days associated with the contributor agreement. 15:23:59 Larry: The CLA is signed up front. 15:24:13 Mike: So you can't contribute your bit of IP and then walk away. 15:24:54 Larry: Your commitment is related to your own contribution 15:25:06 ...at the end of the process when the OWF is signed, the contribution is for the entire spec. 15:25:50 Arnaud: What we agree on (I'm hearing): 15:25:57 - we should have small barrier up front to participation 15:26:18 - you can raise questions with the PSIG 15:26:35 Mike: It's a good requirement that someone can't come in and contribute IP and then walk away 15:28:39 Mike: what about the strawman proposal that comm groups that do specs operate under CLA and OWFa? 15:32:09 [Question of spec transition to rec track[ 15:34:43 Mike: I don't think you shoudl use the IPR policy to add value. 15:38:19 IJ: I am trying provide some protection in community land and motivation to move to rec track 15:38:33 Mike: You should focus on adding value and not adding process complexity. 15:38:55 Arnaud: The "more certainty" is consensus around decisions. 15:39:11 Mike: The community has non-assert from community that created it. 15:39:39 Arnaud: I agree with Mike that the value add is probably not there. The difference is in the level of endorsement. 15:40:14 ..the value is in the level of endorsement (small community, w3c community, international community [ipr]) 15:40:24 ...the value is not in the additional IPR commitments. 15:44:31 lrosen: the owfa agreement would satisfy the w3c patent policy on its own 15:45:03 [w3c patent policy has a promise for a license] 15:46:05 lrosen: there are some bonuses for the formal track....at least I think they add value 15:46:14 ..the brand does add value; it means something important 15:46:34 lrosen: I expect that over time the community groups would learn to do things in a w3c way 15:46:45 Arnaud: I think it comes down to level of endorsement. 15:47:11 (govts like to rely on specs from organizations they are familiar with) 15:47:59 Arnaud: I don't think the "RF commitment" bit alone will drive people to use the rec track, but it does add to a broader set of vlaues 15:48:01 s/vlaues/values 15:48:31 lrosen: I'd like to also suggest that the real value of w3c is probably not in the individual specs (which could be done in any number of fora) 15:48:47 ...the real value is that, as a Member of w3c, you get opportunities to sponsor work and create a direction for the organization 15:48:59 ...to focus w3c on certain kinds of community groups rather than others. 15:49:21 rrsagent, make minutes 15:49:21 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/09/03-newstd-minutes.html Ian 15:50:28 Summarize some key points: 15:50:40 - avoid submarine case is lower priority 15:50:45 - keep it simple 15:51:16 - don't try to preserve "IPR value" or rec above all else; the value proposition for the rec track lies elsewhere (or at least not entirely with the rf commitments) 15:52:16 IJ: What gating, if any when you make the transition to WG 15:52:19 [not discussed yet] 15:52:48 lrosen: To contribute to an apache project, you sign a collaborative agreement. So there's value from the set of those agreements (both individual and company) 15:52:56 ...there's also value to the definition of a set of processes 15:53:15 ...so, e.g., you can release some code unless there's a vote among contributors 15:53:32 ...so there is a certain amount of bureaucray but the board puts those processes in place and steps back 15:53:57 Arnaud: what does OWFa bring that the CLA doesn't bring? 15:54:18 lrosen: OWFA is for "final" specs (for some definition of "final"). 15:55:53 [discussion of people not signing owfa at the end] 15:57:04 Arnaud: I'll reply what I heard: 15:57:14 - cla is limited to contribution 15:57:23 - you expand your commitment to the whole spec at the end. 15:57:41 - in w3c we avoid the sign-off at the end 15:58:34 -Mike_Champion 15:58:48 zakim, close this item 15:58:48 I do not know what agendum had been taken up, Ian 15:58:57 topic: Review current status of developer portal proposal 15:59:05 http://www.w3.org/2010/07/community#portal 16:00:58 topic: Review current status of infrastructure requirements 16:01:03 http://www.w3.org/2010/07/community#infrastructure 16:02:36 Topic: Next meeting 16:02:47 IJ: May not convene a call unless really necessary 16:02:58 Arnaud: I think it's better to schedule a call early to get people to block off time 16:03:55 tx dom 16:03:58 -dom 16:04:31 rrsagent, make minutes 16:04:31 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/09/03-newstd-minutes.html Ian 16:04:41 rrsagent, set logs public 16:04:43 -Larry_Rosen 16:04:46 -Arnaud_LeHors 16:04:47 Team_(newstd)15:00Z has ended 16:04:50 Attendees were Ian, Arnaud_LeHors, Mike_Champion, dom, Larry_Rosen 16:04:55 Arnaud has left #newstd 16:20:49 Meeting: new standards task force 16:20:51 rrsagent, make minutes 16:20:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/09/03-newstd-minutes.html Ian