AB/2016 Priorities
Security strategy
participants : VG, T, JZ, DS
Objective : develop the security awareness and activity in W3C
See: AB 2016 Priorities: Security page for more.
2017-02 AB f2f final report
Virginie: We sent requests to the TAG and Web Sec IG to better understand what would be helpful ... to better support security ... we got 2 types of answers ... 1) let WGs be autonomous in how they perform security work ... give them the right security tools (the questionnaire is one) ... 2) we need a reference pool of experts when there is no skills in WGs
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project
Supergroups
- Leads
- CMN, DS
- Participants
- JJ
- Status
- finish proposal to change chartering process when spec drafts are to be carried into a new charter; is before PSIG and under consideration for implications of integration by the Process CG
- Maintenance questions moved to Maintenance item (all? like, fixing an old spec. produced by a different population?)
- ease-of-chartering: rather than leaving re-chartering a miserable exercise and doing it less accurately and often, we'd prefer to make it easy to re-charter and have charters that are up to date and accurate; need data on why re-chartering is miserable (sometimes?)
2017-02 AB f2f final report
chaals: we achieved our initial goal for the last couple of years ... there are loose ends ... ongoing questions: "should you be able to make commitments to specific pieces of work?" ... it's rising again due to practical needs ... if someone is interested, that could be added to next year's priorities
Best practices for rec track
- Best Practices for incubation and transition to rec track
Participants : MC (lead), JJ, TÇ, JZ, JK, CW
The draft Best Practices document is at https://github.com/w3c/standards-track/blob/master/bp.md
- Please file feedback/issues at the Issues for that repo!
2017-02 AB f2f final report
Mike: yesterday's discussion
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project Incubation & REC Track Best Practices
Role of Director
- Leads
- JZ, DS
- Participants
- VG, MC, JZ, JK, CW
- Status
- Immediately, present proposals for Process Revision to the AC (Lisbon?)
The AB as a whole is reviewing the role of the Director, to ensure it is up to date with the way we work and to consider what might happen and what to do if we need to transition to a new Director one day.
2017-02 AB f2f final report
David: clean up required to ensure it is up to date with the way we work and to consider what might happen and what to do if we need to transition to a new Director one day. ... I'd like to resurrect that work ... I don't think it's major
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project Role of Director
Maintenance
Leads: TÇ, MC
- Obsoleting (potentially rescinding) of abandoned specs (related to previous Identify work not destined for success)
- Errata/maintenance/bug fixing of older specs (process implications, see above under SuperGroups)
- IPR for maintenance (corrigenda, amendments) when members were not members of the original group
- Identify most glaring examples of neglected specs where there is an active WG and specs are part of their charter.
Evidence of maintenance problem
"and in fact more than a third of web standards aren’t implemented by any of the most popular browsers"
Specifications that browsers have neglected / ignored / left behind per:
Looking ahead: Microsoft Edge for developers in 2016: Building for the future of the web
Filter TR for Obsolescence
Modest proposal for a coarse "shaking of the tree" to find out what can/should be obsoleted and what may just need some maintenance.
- On the TR page, what is obsolete and what is not?
- If in doubt, shall we propose obsoleting and see who speaks up against that?
- If someone speaks up, say thank you, we need you to help by being responsible for maintenance.
- If they refuse to do maintenance, or pretend there isn't any, make it clear that any actually in-use spec has bugs that are being discovered and need fixing.
- Is PNG an exception to this?
Specifications to obsolete
Date, specification to obsolete as part of maintenance, and reason for doing so (hyperlinked to further discussion / minutes)
- 2016-01-12 P3P Recommendation - AB Resolution: Propose deprecation due to obsolescence and lack of current usage
- 2016-03-24 Propose obsoleting over deprecating (same reasons).
- 2016-01-12 PICS Recommendations[1][2][3][4] - AB Resolution: Propose deprecation due to obsolescence and lack of current usage
- 2016-03-24 Propose obsoleting over deprecating (same reasons).
- ...
Anyone can propose obsoleting a specification, per the process, and the W3C Director (and team) decides to take action appropriately.
The AB highly recommends that any proposal to obsolete (or rescind) a specification be accompanied with reason(s) why.
Taxonomy Of Specs
We have determined three distinct clusters of W3C specifications that likely merit different approaches to maintenance.
Latest At W3C
The latest version of the specification is at W3C.
There is no work happening on it anywhere else.
Examples:
- CSS (various CSS specifications)
- ...
Abandoned At W3C and External Maintenance
There is an (effectively) abandoned version of a specification at W3C.
There is an external group is actively maintaining it.
Examples:
- URL
Iteration at W3C and External Maintenance
There is some iteration of the specification happening at W3C.
There is also an external group maintaining the specification separately.
Examples:
- HTML (WPWG actively working on HTML 5.x, WHATWG actively maintaining HTML)
- ...
Specifications That May Need Maintenance
Specifications that may need maintenance as identified by various AB members:
- PNG
- CSS Speech
- File System API
- ...
2017-02 AB f2f final report
[sense of the room is that much maintenance accomplished such as Obsolescence in Process 2017, great progress on Rec Track Readiness document happened, more is needed.]
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project Maintenance
Modern Tools
participants : VG, JK That topic relates to the new framework the systeam is developing to rpovide new tools to the W3C community. It covers :
- integrating github in W3C spec development
- WG dashboard (with web APIs and Unitas https://github.com/w3c/Unitas)
- Loomio usage
2017-02 AB f2f final report
Jay: [and virginie] no progress Virginie: What is left to do? ... API, designed by systeam ... we might tried to see if it's used by different WGs Jeff: we moved to github ... echidna ... we got a lot done Virginie: Yes, true ... I wonder if the AB believes there is more to do
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project Tooling
Voting
- Leads
- JJ, CMN
- Status
- AB has requested the Team to propose a switch to STV voting, using a system they are confident in maintaining.
- A proposal will be needed for a Process change
2017-02 AB f2f final report
Jeff: Voting ... done Jeff: we're about to get an election using the STV mechanism
Funding transparency
Funding transparency and how to deploy team resources
participants : CW (lead), VG, CMN
2017-02 AB f2f final report
Chris: we didn't do a whole lot in 2016
- The AB identified as a 2017 priority project Funding & W3C Structure (4 hosts)
Be more global
The need to do even more to help in making our community fully global. See separate wiki.
- Leads
- JZ, JK, CMN
- Status
- Ongoing work
2017-02 AB f2f final report
JudyZ: we made some progress last year chaals: there is more to do Jay: also, how should the AB help at the AC meeting in Beijing JudyZ: and TPAC maybe Jeff: speakers guidelines is helpful ... cf. https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/2017ac/April/speakers-guidelines.html JudyZ: I heard good feedback on AB at the TPAC in Lisbon ... including the AB moderating Jeff: I have not figured out yet moderators ... in Lisbon we have good moderators but they didn't know exactly what do to ... clumsy role David: we should do it again with some guidelines <dsinger> offers (possibly out of sequence here in the minutes) notes for moderators: enforce the speaking guidelines, make sure people are comprehensible to non-english speakers, interrupt and ask them to expand acronyms etc. as needed, manage the speaker queue, integrate the IRC and standing-at-the-mike queues, manage questions, cut off pontificators masquerading as questions, monitor AC-chat and notice when people say they are lost/can’t-follow etc.... <tantek> +1 to dsinger - I think it's worth emphasizing moderation guidance and mentorship like that <dsinger> more for moderators: make sure panel sessions have questions from the audience. solicit them in IRC and pick questions to feed to the panel.
Return to AB wiki home page.