Agenda

• Quick summary
• Policy question: chair selection
• Transition topics
• Discussion/questions

Data

Example: Responsive Images

• Specification for picture element:
  • lets developers declare multiple sources for an image and, through CSS Media Queries, control when those sources are to be presented.
• Announced in August:
  • HTML Working Group expects to integrate into HTML5

Example: JSON for Linking Data

• JSON-LD in charter scope of RDF Working Group
• RDF suggested "get this done in a CG"; they did
• RDF WG took up 2 and published Working Drafts in July

Agenda

• Quick summary
• Policy question: chair selection
• Transition topics
• Discussion/questions

Note: For the topics covered in this presentation, CGs and BGs may be treated equivalently.

Policy question: chair selection

• Currently:
  • "The participants of the Group choose their Chair(s)."
• Some people have suggested stronger algorithm
  • Initial chair can self-select
  • After that, how does group choose? (Should be simple!)
    • Anyone can start?
    • Supermajority elects?
    • How long does election last?
    • Can people who join during election vote?
  • How to avoid denial of service attack?
    • Delay between elections?

Agenda

• Quick summary
• Policy question: chair selection
• Transition topics
• Discussion/questions

Note: For transitions, CGs and BGs are the same. We use "CG" for simplicity.

Good fit between CGs and WGs

• Basic CG-to-WG scenario is:
  • CG develops a specification for a period of time
  • WG takes up specification, CG moves on to other topics
  • WG turns into a standard through W3C process
• Ways we facilitate transition:
  • Patent commitments flow from CGs to WGs
  • CG process enables continued participation by invited experts when work moves to a WG.

Not always a perfect fit

• WG finalizing version N of a specification. CG launched to start work on version N + 1.
• CG created to publish a new specification under permissive copyright, but topic is within scope of a WG.
• WG takes up a mature CG specification, but some in community want to keep working in CG.

Who decides to transition a specification?

• A WG might decide that it wants to take up a CG specification
• A CG might want its specification taken up
• Requirements:
  • Report must be in English (per W3C and CG process)
• Recommendations:
  • Get agreement between WG and CG before any publication
  • Call for Final Specification commitments prior to requesting transition to a WG.
  • If there is dissent within the CG about publication of the report, not a good time to advance to WG.

Working Group wants to take up specification

• If WG charter has deliverable in scope, then can take up specification.
• Otherwise, WG must request rechartering with new scope.
• People can appeal to Director for any Working Group scope question.

Community Group wants specification taken up

• CG may request that Chair of existing WG with proper scope take up work.
  • Group is not required to take up work, but may by WG decision.
• CG may ask Director to create a new Working Group
  • The request is via the Community Development Lead
  • If the Staff accepts the request, a Domain Lead is assigned and staff follows usual process of advance notice, then call for review of charter.
  • Recommended: CG creates a draft WG charter for the Director (see charter generator)

How does licensing work?

• Actual patent commitments flow to WGs automatically
  • CG participant not required to join WG
  • CG participant may exclude as usual (even if CG participant is not in WG)
  • See agreements (e.g., CLA) for what constitutes actual commitment.
• Copyright is permissive
  • Implication: Anybody (including a WG) may take up any CG report
• Policies are not designed WG->CG
  • W3C Document License is not permissive in this direction.
  • Even if derivative work created by CG, patent commitments do not automatically flow from WG.
  • This is the same situation as WG->WG
• Edge cases
  • Single contributor (facilitates flow in WG->CG direction)

Agenda

• Quick summary
• Policy question: chair selection
• Transition topics
• Discussion/questions

What do you want to talk about?

• Process or policy issues/questions (see staff notes)
• Activating community council
• 2012 survey results
• Activity tracking and dashboards
• Redesign sneak peek