Wg-effectiveness-comments

Expert Mix

A working group should have expertise in implementation and testing from throughout the deployment chain

Comments:

• It is not suitable to define the components of a WG and it is not feasible to just ask experts to join WG.
• Recommend to define the WG standardization procedure. For example, a spec must pass the security review, privacy review, testing review, etc. Then in each review step, the relevant experts would join the WG.

Diplomatic Leadership

Effective leadership is key to a successful working group. Chairs should have technical understanding of their group's topic, they should have a drive to complete the work and the skills to encourage their group members to work on their scoped specifications.

The group related W3C team contact should be approachable, knowledgeable about the working group subject and have an in-depth understanding of core common dependency specs and the W3C process.

Comments:

• Need a regular evaluation mechanism of Chair and team contact, to evaluate their eligibility.
• In the case that the WG schedule is delayed, it is also required to do the evaluation, to find out the whether it is caused by Chair or team contact, and to decide whether to replace them.

Scope-Strict Charter

Charter scope should be defined during the working group planning phase and should be strict.

Comments:

• It is recommended to make "Scope-Strict Charter" and "Diplomatic Leadership" as the short-term goal.

Other comments

• Add a new item "Tooling". Now WG needs to work on multiple specs. Some WGs would choose to write spec in wiki, then editor has to change wiki spec to the standard W3C spec format, which involves many manual work and reduce the efficiency. So the automatic tools are needed, like can change the contents on wiki to standard W3C spec format automatically.

Edited by Judy Zhu, 13 Oct, 2017