AB/2018 Priorities

From W3C Wiki
< AB
These are past priorities. For the current AB Priorities see AB/Priorities

2018 Priority Projects

Top priority projects for the AB in 2018.

Living Standards

Leaders: Dave and Wendy


Discussion and proposals are on the Continuous Publications page.

Globalisation and Diversity

Leaders: Jay and Judy

Reference: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Global_Topic

Two specific areas that might benefit from investigation:

  1. looking at providing a way for volunteers to provide translations of specifications; we had a system but dropped it
  2. we tried one idea to improve non-english-native-speakers' participation at AC meetings (the side multi-lingual channel), and it did not work; how can we improve participation and involvement?

Objective:

  1. To understand the real diversity
  2. To discuss widely and frankly from all over the world
  3. To make W3C more robust and sustainable for the future
  4. To investigate the current aspects and identify the problems --(Judy)
  5. To determine the solutions for improvement of globalization and diversity --(Judy)

Analysis:

  1. Aspect: Culture, Language, Region, Politics, Civilization, Education. --(Judy) Add: Website, Gender
  2. Decision Making way: Debate, Consensus, silent something.
  3. Relationship with I18n

Outcome:

  1. more active participation to the meeting
  2. Voting Ab and TAG. --(Judy) Modify: Diversity of Voting in AB, TAG, WG and IG
  3. Organization structure

Diversity - communication with non-native

I18N:

  • W3C could improve the participation of members from Southeast Asia and Mongolia, to guarantee I18N to satisfy requirements from these regions.


Diversity Scholarship:

  • Suggestion: Make it a regular program
  • W3C should have a follow-up on the 3 awardees this year, to collect info like their feeling and gain after attending TPAC, any positive influence on the W3C's diversity


Diversity of market use cases and requirements: Globalization and Diversity is not limited to language or culture, but also includes use cases and requirements from different market

  • For example, in China market, the user share of mobile native APP is much higher than Web, and many native APPs are using Web technologies. Therefore, many Web developers are working on native APP development. However, many Web standards in W3C seem only considering the compatibility with the browsers.
  • For the W3C DOM standard, it is designed for traditional PC browsers, maybe it's not a good practice for mobile devices. Some features, like pointer, forms, navigator and media, mobile’s requirements are quite different with PC’s.
  • Suggestion: the web should also consider the compatibility with native app and mobile platforms, such as Android and iOS, not just with the browsers.

WHATWG relationship

Leader: Mike

Working Group Effectiveness

Leader: Natasha [GitHub repository](https://github.com/w3c/wg-effectiveness)

W3C Website

Leaders: Léonie and Tantek

There is a team TF working on this. They've identified a number of milestones. It makes sense to combine our efforts, and Léonie has offered to act as liaison between the AB and the TF.

Funding (in and out), organisational structure

Leaders: Chaals, Chris

Can we improve on the current hosting arrangements at W3C?

The global structure is meant to reinforce the global nature of W3C. Does it work to do this? Can we change the structure to better support W3C's mission and needs?

Benefits:

  • local W3C staff can often help members better than people on another continent who speak another language - see also #Globalisation_and_Diversity
  • locally prestigious organisations can attract member interest
  • ability to recruit in different locations attracts a wider range of potential employees
  • resilience in the face of local economic or political effects

Drawbacks:

  • complex management structures can make the organisation unwieldy
  • representation is more often required for technical diversity than a particular location

Funding

  • Is the W3C membership fee model appropriate for the spending needs of the consortium?
  • Do members' contributions get largely spent on members' priorities?
  • Are the fee categories roughly equitable?
  • What can we change?

Maintenance

Leaders: Florian, Tantek

How can we best improve the maintenance of both individual specs at W3C, and TR as a whole as representative of standards to implement for the Open Web Platform.

Objectives:

  1. Analyze AB/2017 Priorities#Maintenance results
  2. Reinforce what worked so it keeps working
  3. Identify "almost done" aspects and prioritize those for wrapping up
  4. Identify roadblocks and other stuck things and investigate causes with the goal of addressing them in 2018.

Historical Planning information

An initial list of possible 2018 priority project candidates, discussed in October 2017 face to face meeting:

Succession Planning [JJ-M]
Getting more TAG/AB Candidates [JJ-L][CW-L]
Pain of Wide Review [JJ-L][CMN-M]
Allocating member funding [JJ-M][CW-H][CMN-H]
Use of external tools [MC-L] [JJ-M] [DS-M] [JZ-L][NR-M][CMN-H]
What policies are there, what commitments are we asking / requiring to make
Maintenance[MC-H] [JJ-H] [DS-H] [JZ-H][CW-M][TÇ-H]
We should continue to iterate and improve the maintenance lifecycle.[TÇ]
We should focus now on the social aspects of how we incentivize the community to do the maintenance [JJ]
We should investigate reasons why WHATWG specs are generally better maintained and consider how to apply those lessons [MC]
Funding and organisational structure [MC -H] [JJ-L] [DS-M] [JZ-M][NR-H][CW-H]
Is the host structure working for us? Could we, should we, incorporate? What would a transition look like?
Security [JJ-H][DS-L - someone needs to tell me what the AB action is] [JZ-M][TÇ-M]
Charter approval agility [MC-L] [JJ-L] [DS-L] [JZ-L]
Role of director [MC-L] [JJ-L] [DS-L] [JZ-L][NR-H][TÇ-M]
What are the next steps in looking ahead to when TimBL is not so deeply involved?
Internal tooling...[MC-M] [JJ-M] [DS-M] [JZ-M]
We have a variety of W3C-specific tools of varying age and use; do any need revising, retiring, or new ones developing?
W3C Website [MC-M] [JJ-H] [DS-H] [JZ-H][NR-H][TÇ-H]
Famous for having dark corners and unfound filing drawers in basements where the lights don't work
The condition of our website is really hurting. Unfortunately, every time we look at it, it is an expensive proposition to fix [JJ]
Working Group Effectiveness [MC-H] [JJ-H] ]DS-M] [JZ-H] [WS-H][NR-H][CW-L]
Process 2019 [MC-L] [JJ-M] [DS-L] [JZ-M][NR-H][TÇ-M]
Living Standards [MC-M] [JJ-H] [DS-H] [JZ-H] [WS-H][NR-M][CW-M]
What do we need to do to make this a viable modus operandi at the W3C (and it's probably not just process changes)?
What do we mean by "Living Standards"
I would be willing to lead this if we can frame the problem and if some other AB folks help out [JJ]
Some questions for exploration: For specs undergoing continuous improvement, could we trigger patent commitments on something other than Rec? What to do when interests in stability and agility conflict? [WS]
Member agreement [MC-L] [JJ-L] [DS-L] [JZ-L]
There are aspects of the Member Agreement which are puzzling, out of date, or missing (there is no explicit copyright grant, for example)
Nomination committees [MC-H] [JJ-L] [DS-M] [JZ-L][NR-H]
Should we have a committee that tries to ensure a qualified, diverse, and competitive slate for AB and TAG elections? (No control over the slate). Who would serve on it?
I [MC]wouldn't frame this as "have a committee", I would frame it as motivating the AB and TAG seek ways to build a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farm_team where interested members can help with the work and the most qualified/energetic ones are identified, publicly recognized, and encouraged to run for election.
IETF relationship [MC-L][JJ-L] [DS-L] [JZ-L][NR-M]
I would rate this higher if someone point out what the problem was [JJ] [+1 MC]
WHATWG relationship [MC-H] [JJ-H] [DS-H] [JZ-M][NR-H][CW-H][TÇ-M]
Liaisons generally [MC-L] [JJ-L] [DS-L] [JZ-L][NR-L]
DS might rate this higher if he knew what the question was
Globalisation and Diversity [MC-M] [JJ-H] [DS-H] [JZ-H][NR-H]
CMN would like a specific action to do some kind of periodic review of our diversity
JJ thinks that the most immediate problem in Globalization and Diversity is to grow participation (even by Members) in geographies where English is rarely the first language.
Community Participation [MC-H] [JJ-L] [DS-M] [JZ-H][NR-H]
Experimenting on the Web Platform [MC-L] [JJ-M] [DS-M] [JZ-M][NR-M]
HTML Strategy [MC-M] [JJ-M] [DS-M] [JZ-M][CW-M][CMN-H]
Maintaining and evolving HTML is an ongoing challenge that is related to almost all the other topics. The AB should analyze how proposed changes triggered by the other discussions would affect the web community's ability to keep the HTML standard useful and viable, and to use HTML as a case study when considering problems and solutions to the other topics.

Assignments

Topic H M L Weight Lead
Living Standards 6 1 2 22 Dave and Wendy
Globalisation and Diversity 3 2 3 16 Jay and Judy
WHATWG relationship 5 0 1 16 Mike
How are member funds allocated 4 1 1 15 Chris
Working Group Effectiveness 4 1 1 15 Natasha
W3C Website 2 3 2 14 Leonie and Tantek
Funding and organisational structure 3 1 2 13 Chaals
Maintenance 2 3 1 13 Tantek
HTML Strategy 2 1 1 9
Process 2019 0 4 1 9
Community Participation 1 1 3 8
Nomination committees 1 2 0 7
Grief of Wide Review 0 3 0 6
Getting more to run for AB/TAG 1 1 0 5
Security 0 1 3 5
Experimenting on the Web Platform 0 2 0 4
Charter approval agility 0 1 1 3
Internal tooling... 0 1 1 3
Use of external tools 0 1 1 3
Role of director 0 1 0 2
Succession Planning 0 1 0 2
IETF relationship 0 0 0 0
Liaisons generally 0 0 0 0
Member agreement 0 0 0 0

See Also

Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=AB/2018_Priorities&oldid=115975"