View source for AB/Candidate topics for 2018 AC meetings

This page is an [[AB]] project to help with the [https://www.w3.org/2018/05/AC/ac-agenda.html 2018 Berlin AC meeting agenda].

This list consists of brainstorming ideas for AC meetings; numbers in brackets indicate a strawpoll of the AB over which ones to pursue. Candidates for the Berlin AC meeting have a bullet explaining what the session might be.

Other topics are candidates (along with proposals from the AC) for at least BOF tables at lunch and possibly a break-out session or two. 

For each module, we need to decide whether we take
* no questions
* clarification questions
* discussion questions
and when the questions happen – immediately after the module, after a group of modules, or in open mic session at the end of day.

Since we hope for lively debate and engagement, we would like to have moderation for each session. The moderation should in general help ensure the session runs well; the speaker doesn't run over or into question time, doesn't speak too fast or in acronyms, jargon, or idiom; manage the speaker queue at the mics and in IRC; and the questions are focused and short (not speeches from the mic). Each session organizer should further specialize what the role of the moderator is for that specific session.

# Aspirational vs. Implemented (1)
# Explore and explain STV (5)
#* Natasha explains STV, how it works, how we tabulate, how to vote, what "no other candidate" means (and might imply), equal preference, and so on. 15 mins
# blockchain standards (1) 
# Distributed Identity (2)
# selected AB priorities, e.g. living standards, (2)
# selected AB priorities, e.g. whatwg, (6)
#* Mike explores with a panel, what modes of reference and collaboration are available (and potentially acceptable), what issues are outstanding and how can we address them? 30 mins
# selected AB priorities, e.g. working group effectiveness, update on w3.org/Guide, what's there, is it working for you (3)
# selected AB priorities, e.g. w3c website, both internal and public-facing (0)
# Diversity (4)
#* Chaals organizes a session that catalyzes a discussion on the axes of diversity, particularly geo/cultural as well as gender, what it can mean to include and work with cultures other than your own, how we're doing on them, how we can do better; panel (possibly Natasha and Mike on what they learned working in Japan, Judy and Angel on working with anglo-culture). 60 mins
# Net Neutrality (3)
# AMP –  good or bad for the web? (5) 
#* Natasha designs a 'US high-school debate' on why AMP is good and bad for the web, a couple of people on each side, what AMP is and is an example of, the TAG findings, the designers etc.  What standards work does this suggest or provoke?  30 mins
#** I'd like someone very AMP-critical on this like Jeremy Keith or Ethan Marcotte. I can do this as well. -Tantek
# Fixing Web perf (2)
# Digital advertising (1)
# Industrie 4.0 & WOT (0)
# Web Games; recent developments, cool things that you might not realize we can do, things we'd like to do but cannot (5)
#* Mike Smith to organize exciting and illuminating demos and what they tell us. 60 mins
# GDPR and privacy; maybe a panel session with an advertising org and a privacy advocate (3)
# TAG/AB , are we getting the candidates we need, the impact we want, and the votes we deserve (6)
#* Jeff gives a historical overview of elections, candidate and vote counts. Focus on power and effectiveness and technical breadth and diversity, but link to the general diversity discussion and STV discussions (for general diversity). Do we need to change the TAG or AB remit and charter? 45 mins (10 min report, 30 min discussion)
# Prioritization and Resource allocation (3)
# The Immersive Web ("new web"), VR/XR, Immersive (5)
#* Chris to lead on new emerging technologies and opportunities in immersive web, VR/XR etc. 30 mins
# Web in region (3)
# X-layer discussions (1)
# State of progressive web apps (3)
# Hosts and structure of W3C (6)
#* Jeff to lead on what we have explored in self-hosting and hybrid models, what it would mean, questions it raises (board, reserve funds, hos many offices and so on). 30 mins
# Credibility and fake media, maybe a talk or panel session with someone from a local (German) newpaper? What are the appropriate rules for online social behavior? Maybe a speaker from Germany. (5)
#* Dave works with Georg from the German office on finding an inspirational speaker on the challenges, questions, and concerns raised here. Maybe finish with an international and diverse panel for discussion and questions. 60 mins
# Short demos on specs nearing completion and being implemented: how does this spec. change the web? (5)
#* Dom (team) to help get a list together of cool recent spec. and implementation work, we work with that list to give a few scintillating and inspiring demos. 30 mins
# Is PDF good or bad for the web? (2)
# Specs and code (maybe specs and other things: code, registries, etc.) – licensing and other considerations, challenges and how to handle them (3)
# Opportunities to collaborate with open-source projects (3)
# Tooling, internal and external and how it defines and interacts with work culture; GitHub, IRC, WebEx, email, meeting management, dashboards (2)
# On the Web or in an App? (5)
#* Wendy and Judy Zhu to explore what's in native that would be more suitable on the web if we only had the right specs, "horses for courses" and gap analysis. Explore some places with both native and web apps and what's good or bad about each. 60 mins.
# W3C and public policy issues (e.g. net neutrality)
#* +1 [[User:Tantekelik|Tantek Çelik]] ([[User talk:Tantekelik|talk]]) 19:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

=== Potential storyboard of an AC meeting ===

See [https://www.w3.org/2018/05/AC/ac-agenda.html 2018 Berlin AC meeting agenda].

Above is a discussion of potential topics for the May 2018 AC meeting in Berlin, discussed at the AB F2F in December of 2017.  From that discussion and prioritization work, we can imagine a two day meeting as follows.  Typically, an AC meeting is comprised of 8 1.5 hour models; 4 on each of the two day meeting.  From the above discussion, it seems that the following overall structure would work:
=Storyboard=
#Theme 1 - General intro session.  Need facilitator whose primary role is to encourage participation in discussion. - '''facilitator: Coralie'''
#* CEO Overview (30 minutes).  Purpose: Informational.  Contents include: Compulsories; objective of this particular meeting.
#* STV Explained (Natasha, 30 minutes).  Purpose: Informational.  Contents include: How it works, how we tabulate, how to vote, what "no other candidate" means (and might imply), equal preference
#* TBD: Issues of the day (30 minutes).  Possibly an Open MIC that would tee up questions for deeper discussion on Day 2.
#Theme 2 - WHATWG.  Purpose - provide exposure to the AC about how W3C and WHATWG are thinking about working together, and getting the AC's input and advice.  Need facilitator whose primary role is to encourage input and advice from the AC - '''facilitator: Natasha'''
#* W3C's perspective (15 minutes, Jeff)
#* WHATWG Steering Group perspective (15 minutes, panel, MC, DB, MS, SS)
#* Input and advice from Advisory Committee (60 minutes)
#Theme 3 - Diversity in W3C.  Purpose.  Discuss diversity issues within W3C, progress, potential approaches, both in general and in the W3C elected bodies.  Develop approaches to improvement.  Needs facilitator to drive participation in audience discussion. - '''facilitator: Jay'''
#* Overview (15  minutes, Jeff)
#** Historical overview of elections, candidate and vote counts. 
#** Technical breadth and diversity: gender; geo; underrepresented groups.
#** Pose some questions such as: do we need to change the TAG or AB remit and charter? 
#* Panel discussion (30 minutes): Moderator CMN, Participants, JZ, AL, Mike Smith, NR.  What has worked to improve diversity?
#* Audience participation (45 minutes).  What more can we do?
#Theme 4. Demo time.  After a long day of intense discussions of issues, it is time to relax, become enthralled, and enjoy real demos of W3C spec work in progress.
#* One plenary session (60 minutes --probably not 90 as initially drafted) animated by Chris Wilson, Mike Smith, and Dominique Hazael-Massieux, who will find people to do demos (and possibly demo themselves):
#** Immersive Web
#** Games
#**other web related areas.
#* Demos last 10-15 minutes
#* Demo-ers then go to other area at demo table(s) for more questions (depends on topography/layout of room -- to be fleshed-out -- see [https://www.w3.org/wiki/AC2018/Demos Demo-planning wiki])
#Theme 7. Web issues of the day; punctuated by in-country perspectives (in this case Germany).  Organized by David Singer.
#* Panel session looking at fake news and credibililty of the web in Germany.  Developed in conjunction with Georg. (45 minutes)
#** 	Does the Web need fixing? The societal impact of online propaganda, misinformation and fake news 
#** Falk Steiner – experienced journalist in the IT area, outspoken and opinionated, works as a free journalist for Deutschlandradio (DLF, DeutschlandRadio Kultur, DRadio Wissen)
#** Sandro Hawke
#** two others invited, awaiting responses
#* Audience discussion 15 minutes
#* TAG panel 30 minutes
#Theme 6. W3C and Public Policy.  Purpose: gain consensus whether there is a need to update W3C's approach to public policy issues.  Facilitation needed to assess AC's viewpoints and propose a new consensus position.
#*Jeff Jaffe (10 minutes).  Current policy.  PSG Matrix.
#*Net neutrality as a driving discussion for policy issues in general.
#** CMN to express the viewpoint why it is wrong for W3C to weigh in on public policy debates that are unrelated to our technical specifications such as net neutrality (10 minutes).
#** DS to express the viewpoint why it is useful for W3C to provide technical input and guidance that informs public policy debates.  Includes a proposal on how to do so (10 minutes).
#** WS to express the viewpoint why it is vital for W3C to have a public position that supports net neutrality.  Includes a proposal on how to get such a consensus (10 minutes).
#* Discussion with AC (50 minutes), including getting consensus - led by facilitator.
#Theme 5. Core technology issues.  Purpose - identify high level needs for web platform
#* Wendy and JudyZ will lead a panel about app development (60 minutes).  30 minutes opening statements; 30 minutes discussion with AC.  Facilitation needed to get audience participation and assess where there is consensus for new work.
#** What more does the platform need?
#** How much of the need is met by standards, how much by implementation?
#** Gaps between native and web.
#*Natasha will lead a discussion about AMP (30 minutes)
#** Chris Wilson will find someone from Google who will explain the use cases which led to AMP and talk about how it will evolve in the future based on input from the community
#** Andrew Betts will express concerns about AMP 
#** Natasha will moderate input from the AC on what new work is needed in W3C to address the use cases.
#Theme 8. Governance.  Purpose: Get ACs input on long-term governance issues.  Also, discussion time with the AB/Team.
#* Legal entity (45 minutes).  Jeff to share issues and considerations that the Team has been considering internally about the structure of a legal entity, including posing some open questions for dialog with the AC (15 minutes presentation, 30 minute discussion)
#* AB panel (45 minutes)

== See Also ==
* [[moderator responsibilities]]
* [[AB]]