Grab and Go Gallery

Update on Licensing discussion

JB: There are two links in the email I sent earlier http://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical that would allow any FCC-hosted challenge that can use any OSI-approved (Open Source Initiative) license.

http://opensource.org/licenses/category

JB: Some are useful, some may restrict what we can do. I'm not sure we can use any OSI-approved license.
... We would either going to restrict the licences we accept, list the only licenses we will accept.

Peter: We are talking about two different situations - one is what goes through the Challenge.gov and what is sent directly to the Gallery.

JB: We may be looking at a more restrictive list for the Challenge, but if someone looks good, we could ask them to make it available under a less retrictive license.
... I don't want to have a chilling effect, but I also don't want to spend a lot of time evaluating work that we don't want.

[Looking at the OSI Open Source Definitions] http://opensource.org/docs/osd

JB: Free distribution - some of the entries may not be able to be recognized because they are submitting under a license.

Jamal: An observation: A week ago, we talked about someone freely downloading a binary, but these OSI licenses require open source code.

JB: Some of these things don't matter to us, but could be restrictive.
... Derived Works is extremely relevant.

Peter: Integriry of the Author can be a problem if someone is downloading binary files.

JB: I worry about needing legal to vett the licenses of each submission as it comes. That would be even more time consuming.
... Ian Jacobs suggested taking 4 licenses: W3C Software license, GPL, MIT, CCBY

Jan: This is the Grab and Go Gallery, so people should be able to grab and go from a license viewpoint.

JB: Can we do a simple front end and reserve the right to refine this issue.
... I want to move on, so we're looking back at this after a writing round.

<judy> w3c http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231

<judy> mit http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php

<judy> cc by http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

<judy> gpl http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html

<Jan> yep

<Jan> JB: http://appsforcommunities.challenge.gov/rules

<Jan> JB: Wondered if we could reuse but seems maybe too long

<Jan> PK: Looking at (10)

<Jan> Debby: Looking at (3) that referenced OSI

<Jan> Jamal: SSA challenges

<Jan> Debby: Yes but haven't looked at it

<Jan> Jamal: Another relvant...

<Jan> Jamal: Will send URI to list

Jamal: There is another challenge that came in later that uses the Amersterdam?? license, and I will send the link along to the group.

<korn> The main idea that I believe I started with is:

<korn> - use an OSI-approved license for things coming into challenge.gov

<korn> - allow the gallery (perhaps in a "non-grab-and-go section") to also reference non-OSI web apps & templates

<judy> w3c http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231

<judy> mit http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php

<judy> cc by http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

<judy> gpl http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html

<korn> Also: look at rules page item #3 bullets 2 & 3, and item #10

Potential additions to rules

<korn> you are looking for the rules? http://appsforcommunities.challenge.gov/rules

<judy> http://appsforcommunities.challenge.gov/rules

JB: Because we are not doing monetary prizes, perhaps we do not need to have this language. WE may need language for judging to avoid conflict-of-interest.

Jan: It is US centric

Debby: If the Gallery is going to have problems from the Challenge, will that be problem?

JB: Not if we make it clear. We would need clear language in the Gallery to make it clear what we are doing.

Debby: Is the major reward of the Challenge being in the Gallery? If so, we need more of a reward so that

<judy> [judy: so we'd need language in two places: in the challenge.gov; and in the gallery, to define what gets in]

Debby: we can have a separate website of recognition -- it would have to be somewhere meaningful

<judy> [debby's suggested language: the gallery itself may include items that come from other sources]

JB: The reward of getting things into the gallery: The Gallery itself may include items that come from other sources.

<korn> The reward may be "highlighting in the gallery, which may also contain samples that came from other sources"

Debby: Otherwise, so-and-so was a judge and they got into the gallery even though they didn't submit to the Challenge.

Peter: Maybe a difference between getting into the Gallery and getting prominence in the Gallery.

Debby: How about a symbol in the Gallery that shows that THIS one came from the Challenge.

<judy> judy: cheers...

Peter: We could have a selection of small icons that awards recognition, like Prime the Pump submissions.

JB: We wnat announcements from OST, FCC, CIO Council and W3C. The W3C Comm person wants to encourage W3C members to be very present in submissions. He wants a logo on W3C submissions in the Gallery.
... these could be ways to drive up submissions. I can mentally picture a series of thumbnails and some icons that show the source.

Peter: Some submissions may get multiple icon signs. The first "accessible date book" could be another stamp.

JOhn: For the Challenge, we may need the year for multiple times we run the Challenge.

JB: Let's say we get 5 submissions of accessible CAPTCHA, and 4 of them were not accessible, and one went back and fixed them, so "first" could be tricky and contestable. It would become administratively a high cost.
... I like the ideas, I'm just trying to think of ideas how it could work out.

<judy> [collecting interesting issues for discussion for the gallery, but not baked yet for adding in as expectations for the challenge.gov rules yet]

Peter: I just want to get people to send to the Challenge. If it is burdensome, then don't use it, but we need to look for ways to motivate people to submit to the Challenge.

Debby: I am happy to simplify the rules. I just sent a request for our Challenge rules.

Updated draft announcement

JB: Ian Jacobs (W3C Comm) suggested that instead of the current description that is more abstract of templates and widgets, to pull off some items straight from the wish list. Image carousel, date picker, accordian expandable navigation, etc. Use specifics instead of definitions. Also add more ways to participate.
... Any other things you would like to do? If it passes the W3C Comm Team, then it will make it easier to get it approved by your own groups.

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/challenge-gallery/wiki/Grab_and_Go_Gallery?

<judy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/challenge-gallery/wiki/Description -- i will be rewriting this based on his feedback. welcome other feedback too, before rewriting.

Debby: What would help me frame it, would be a question: Is making your webiste accessible too overwhelming and too complex? Help us help make it easier for others.

<judy> [debby: "help us make it easier"]

Updated sample templates

<judy> http://jfciii.com/templates/

John: I was going to have a main page that lists all the asp, jsp, html pages, and list some style pages.

The only one that is finished is the right navigation HTML page.

<judy> judy suggests sending people straight to a template: http://jfciii.com/templates/html/right/default.html

JB: It may be better for Prime the Pump to send people right to the template.
... I like the term "classic template" instead of static template.

Cynthia: what about the idea of asking users to tag when items are no longer relevant to make it easier to maintain.

JB: Cynthia and I will work on that part.

Specifics on longer term gallery

there will be a meeting next week. Regrets from Jan, it is a holiday.