See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
<trackbot> If you want to associate this channel with an existing Tracker, please say 'trackbot, associate this channel with #channel' (where #channel is the name of default channel for the group)
<shepazu> trackbot, start telcon
<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
<trackbot> If you want to associate this channel with an existing Tracker, please say 'trackbot, associate this channel with #channel' (where #channel is the name of default channel for the group)
<inserted> scribenick: hhalpin
Should be CONF1.
<manu> +1 to walkthrough as introduction to CG process
because I do not public-council@w3.org
<manu> Here's the link : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-council/
If people can, type your name and the name of your community group in IRC after you are done talking
<Ian> ontology, lexicalization
<Kristian> Kristian Sons, DFKI, Declarative 3D
<Ian> Tom: Library linked data -> CG
<Ian> ...audio
<Ian> manu: payment
<manu> http://payswarm.com/
W3C will launch Community Group late June->early July
Readwriteweb article
taking advantage of fact that all of you have stepped up
<manu> +1 to beta test
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/
<koalie> W3C Launches Community Groups to Help Create Web Standards
these are our CSS and HTML templates
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/community_business_groupHomepage.html
an index of the pages
<koalie> Ian: Please do not disseminate this page yet.
primary starting point for system
<Ian> w3.org/community
you can join group/support groups/propose new groups
this is the main page for the effort
I would like to talk about "Integrating payments in Web infrastructure", then you click on "proposed group" and then people see it.
Its a simple process.
It's a simple button push with name
of group, description, etc.
mailback loop for public account
when counter goes up to 5 you automagically get infrastructure
(in future)
in short term, we plan on people with trusted accounts to approve groups.
if you show up, and you want to have discussion over your proposal to refine
<Ian> W3C Forum
we will have a forum to start that discussion - that's the W3C Forum, will be a blog
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/communitygroupHomepage.html
that page shows the tooling
for the default groups
and groups outside the W3C should also be host their own tools, some outside w3.org
so you can keep using your wiki somewhere else, etc.
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/
its a two step IPR polciy
derivied from OWF policy
so you sign a "contributor agreement"
for anything I as an individual contribute, it's avaialble on these terms
we have struck a balance between the uselessness of individual patent commitments
and the own contributions
to make it easy to join
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/join_group_employee.html
we have four join pages depending on your affliation, as that requires different patent commitments
member employee:
what a hassle to get my AC rep to fill out this form
"I don't even know who my AC rep is!"
:)
since IPR commitment is so light, would you accept engineers making commitments, this didn't work.
Why don't we queue up commitments from engineers, and we queue them up and send them to AC rep
<koalie> [this process is fantastic]
AC Rep form is what you have now
there's a little optimization that lets the AC Rep do ONE form rather than three for each engineer
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/Request/Merged
The ink is really tremendously wet on this one...
this one simplifies the account management
so imagine the group working for a while
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/newPublication.html
\me w3cleaks
brand new scheme for publishing stuff
we're going to launch without this quite working
this provides URI to publicaiton
add editors etc.
the system will announce it on groups page
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/updatePublication.html
report is out system
out of system
at some point group says they're done
then we call for "final specification commiments"
this signals the communty that this is a stable draft
grabs full-text commitments over final draft
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/licensing_commitments.html
(thinking maybe a list of "people who have not given their commitments" :) would be perhaps controversial but could help)
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/final_specification_commitment.html
so this allows community to apply pressure over licensing commitments
to people who haven't.
then they make their final commitment
at end of day
then we can tell when everyone has made commitments, which would allow us to speed up the transition to a W3C Working Group
we're looking at charter generator etc.
send it to AC for review possibly with shorter review cycle
now its a WG
(maybe)
<manu> How many people from the community can go across to the Working Group? Is it pretty typical from the standpoint of how it happens now (balance of Member companies and Invited Experts)?
there exists buttons to leave group, etc.
<Zakim> manu, you wanted to ask about publications, where they show up on W3C, how they're titled, etc.
manu: for example, think of web
payments spec - we'll use some tools like respec
... each spec will have current status on it, etc, probably
some changes to respec
... when its published, it goes to W3C space
... where does community group specs go?
... not /TR I assume?
<Ian> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/community/src/reports.html
<manu> We have an issue w/ one spec per group... some of the work we're doing require one spec per vocabulary, one spec for discovery, and another spec for PaySwarm.
we will have pub rules per spec
but no real pubrules right now - but we want it public, on our site, etc.
we do not want confusion over status of our document
so we'll likely end up with a community group template
similar to the W3C Rec templates
we are working on that kind of template now
<Zakim> manu, you wanted to ask about how we can present W3C's involvement.
manu: how to we represent W3C messaging to companies, people may get confused between Working Group and Community Group process?
we will have a FAQ to help explain what it is, and that it is not on the Rec Track.
i.e. the difference between Community Groups and Working Groups
shepazu: what kinds of tools?
mercurial, wikis, etc. we have other ideas for more social web tools but not quite ready for launch
we're open for augmenting the toolset
<Zakim> manu, you wanted to ask about one spec per group constraint.
companies in general enjoy not having to make decisions on patents
but one of the cost is rechartering
when new deliverables are added
as companies rather reasonably do not want their patent scope to expand dynamically
community group IPR is oriented towards specs, not scope.
commitments don't kick in until spec exists
group works on more than one document
if people haven't signed commitments on particular specs
we want to avoid that confusion
in first iteration we're going to try to have one spec per group.
so we know who contributed what to spec, i.e. looking at archives
<Zakim> manu, you wanted to say that one spec per group may be problematic for Web Payments...
we know it's risky but we're trying to be flexible
manu: payswarm spec calls out to four different Web vocabularies
<shepazu> (I wonder if we can have "shared" mailing lists / forum for different groups
we need this documents in the system
We are trying to solve this problem, but clar it's not perfect suggestion
<Zakim> shepazu, you wanted to suggest model for manu
shepazu: lots of people in a WG
go to particular topics
... people have complained in past that they are interested
only in one particular spec, how to filter though stuff
... so maybe this will be more versatile and natural
Ian: if you are part of a group you are part of group
<manu> I'm concerned that multiple groups may lead to "too many mailing list subscriptions exhaustion"
Ian: but unclear if one-spec per
group and how socially groups work may fit in with IPR
... we are happy to make changes as things progress
<Zakim> F1LT3R_, you wanted to enquire about Blog features...
FILT3R: what are use-cases for
blog, features, how it works
... news items are blog posts
<shepazu> (I find myself more exhausted by amount of traffic on a list, rather than number of lists, but YMMV)
FILT3R: some published as
document
... automatically, but we can also use it to get reviews
etc.
... discussion tool etc.
Ian: various communcations tools,
stuff like Twitter vs. discussion forum software (WordPress
plugin, OStatus) and so far we'll try to keep it simple as
regards WordPress blog
... so people can keep posting to the blog without a W3C
account etc.
<Zakim> johnmccrae, you wanted to ask will there be support for organizing telcos and meetings for the community group?
Ian: Tracker, Zakim, RRSAgent,
but we have issues with providing telecon bridges
... no for Commuity Groups, but yes for Business Group has
paying customer
... as we can't scale our current telecon bridge for the large
amount of telecons we are expecting
<Ian> +1
<koalie> scribenick: koalie
Harry: Reminder that people may
use Skype
... it's just telcon ports they can't get.
... Happy to take questions on the mailing list. About meeting
regularly on the phone. Weekly?
Ian: I'm not sure we need weekly. When we're ready, however, we might need to meet more frequently
Harry: I don't want to do the "giant doodle dance" all of the time.
<Ian> +1 to finding a "good time" that is "semi-reserved"
Ian: Please do send comments and questions
harry: last bit of
homework,
... please, folks, send me names and title of group
... [to do coordination and merge some groups if needed]
<hhalpin> cc public-council@w3.org
<shepazu> public-council@w3.org http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-council/
<hhalpin> Meeting adjourned
[thanks all]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/their/they're/ Succeeded: s/today/day/ Succeeded: s/what it is/what it is, and that it is not on the Rec Track./ Succeeded: s/exitss/exists/ Succeeded: s/its/it's/ Succeeded: s/shepazu/Ian/ Succeeded: s/it/posting to the blog without a W3C account etc./ Succeeded: i/Should be/scribenick: hhalpin Found ScribeNick: hhalpin Found ScribeNick: koalie Inferring Scribes: hhalpin, koalie Scribes: hhalpin, koalie ScribeNicks: hhalpin, koalie Default Present: +1.714.454.aaaa, +3539149aabb, +49.351.4.aacc, +49.151.509.8.aadd, +49.521.106.1.aaee, Ian, +1.617.500.aaff, manu, koalie, Harry_Halpin, Reza, Paul, John, Kristian, Alistair, Tom_Baker Present: +1.714.454.aaaa +3539149aabb +49.351.4.aacc +49.151.509.8.aadd +49.521.106.1.aaee Ian +1.617.500.aaff manu koalie Harry_Halpin Reza Paul John Kristian Alistair Tom_Baker WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 15 Jun 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-community-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]