Community and Business Group transitions to Working Group
11 June 2013, Tokyo, Japan
Overview of this presentation
- Data on CGs
- The "CG2WG" task force
Are CGs accomplishing what we want?
- Encourage more people to bring new idea to W3C.
- Improve our reputation among our stakeholders.
- Help W3C create high quality, relevant standards.
- Strengthen our role as stewards.
- Enable W3C to do more work.
- Enhance the value of Membership, the importance of staff.
Did we encourage more people to bring new ideas to W3C?
We think so, as early June 2013 data confirms:
- 177 Member organizations
- 1061 non-Member organizations
- 2882 total individual participants
- 125 Community Groups, 3 Business Groups
- Nearly 500 new participants in the past 4 months.
- There are 1500 participants in W3C Working Groups.
CG participation history
A history of Community and Business Groups participation:
Did we help W3C create high quality, relevant standards?
- 16 Groups with reports
- 3 CG Reports taken up by Working Groups:
- 2 CGs proposed transition as new WG:
The "CG2WG" task force
Febuary 2013: Task Forces launched.
- Which CGs to transition to Working Group?
- Also, possibly
- do an inventory,
- establish broad classification,
- consider taxonomies,
- advocate for tools (assess activity level, metrics, etc.).
Recent outreach data
35 CG Chairs took our questionnaire.
- 9 ongoing and nearing completion
- 20 ongoing and far from completion
- 4 inactive
- Spec work or discussion fora?
- 18 to produce specification(s)
- 14 are discussion fora
- 9 have a specification to transition.
- 13 do not expect to transition.
Transitions to date
Definition of Transitions:
- CG work moving to the Rec track
- CG draft charter to become a W3C work group
2 CGs transitioned:
- JSON for Linking Data
- Responsive Images
Transitions within 6 months
5 CGs intend to transition within 6 months:
- Core Mobile → Web and Mobile Interest Group [under AC review]
- Customer Experience → digitalData Working Group [in discussion with W3C Team]
- Web Media Text Tracks [in discussion with W3C Team]
- Cloud Computing
Transitions in the middle to long term
10 CGs intend to transition but don't have a schedule for doing so:
- Web Payments
- Open Annotation
- CSS Selector as Fragment Identifiers
- Locations and Addresses
- Speech API (Web Speech Working Group) [under AC review]
- MicroXML (to existing W3C WG)
- Ontology-Lexica (to existing W3C WG)
Barriers to transition
- Too early, and/or insufficient implementations: 12
- non-W3C Members push-back to join a Working Group: 3
- Working Groups == too much bureaucracy: 3
Analysis: Group challenges
- Slow ramp-up, steep learning curve
- Lack of traction, or loss of momentum
- Single-person effort
- How to migrate?
Analysis: Internal aspects
- W3C Group Participants perform better in CGs.
- Team in the critical path of transition to the Rec Track.
- Lack of tools to assess CGs activity.
- 29 CGs have no chair.
- Todo: close dormant groups.
CGs are achieving their goals:
- More people bring new ideas to W3C.
- W3C is doing more work.
- W3C Domains benefit from more eyes on trends.
- Recruitment opportunities of active non-Members.
- Enhanced value of Membership and importance of staff.
- The biggest barrier to transition is natural.
However, there are costs as well.
- Time commitment.
- Scalability challenge.
Multiple next steps
- Conduct more systematic outreach (e.g. transition survey).
- Invest on expanding coordination tools:
- Enpower W3C Domains to monitor CGs on ad-hoc basis.
- Streamline bridgeing to W3C Working Groups.
- Automate some of the process to transition.