search

w3c / strategy

team-strat, on GitHub, working in public. Current state: DRAFT
151 stars 45 forks source link

[wg/webapps] WebApps WG 2023 Rechartering #383

Closed siusin closed 3 months ago

siusin commented 1 year ago

New charter proposal, reviewers please take note.

Charter Review

Proposed Draft Charter: https://w3c.github.io/webappswg/charter/draft-charter-2023.html

What kind of charter is this? Check the relevant box / remove irrelevant branches.

Horizontal Reviews: apply the Github label "Horizontal review requested" to request reviews for accessibility (a11y), internationalization (i18n), privacy, and security. Also add a "card" for this issue to the Strategy Funnel.

Communities suggested for outreach: @siusin /cc @himorin @plehegar

Known or potential areas of concern: None.

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? this strategy funnel issue

Anything else we should think about as we review?

cc @marcoscaceres @LJWatson

plehegar commented 11 months ago

Note: this is waiting on the DAS charter https://github.com/w3c/das-charter/issues/123

siusin commented 9 months ago

Note: this is waiting on the DAS charter w3c/das-charter#123

Resolved.

plehegar commented 9 months ago

We should remove webidl from the charter unless the group intense to do something with it.

cc @marcoscaceres

plehegar commented 8 months ago

Added as a potential PING item for October 5. cc @npdoty

ruoxiran commented 8 months ago

APA is OK with this Charter.

himorin commented 8 months ago

no comment or request from i18n

npdoty commented 8 months ago

"monitoring" may be the wrong framing for privacy-preserving APIs on the Web: the goal of the platform should not be to monitor users' devices, but to allow users who want to to access certain capabilities.

Maybe: "providing" location information, and not necessarily location information of the hosting device. "reacting to changes in motion or orientation"

Defining these specifically as properties of the hosting device or as ongoing monitoring will overconstrain the designed solution in ways that don't align well with privacy.

npdoty commented 8 months ago

Is the Web Apps Working Group going to coordinate with the Devices and Sensors Working Group on geolocation or any other deliverables? If so, this charter should say so.

himorin commented 8 months ago

at the top of section 2 (or 2.1), there might be better to have a pointer to section 12? like, draft state etc. mentioned in description at section 2 are only listed in section 12, but not in section 2.

siusin commented 8 months ago

We should remove webidl from the charter unless the group intense to do something with it.

cc @marcoscaceres

@plehegar @marcoscaceres Oh, what is your final decision on WebIdl?

svgeesus commented 8 months ago

Minor point: maybe

the Group may also produce W3C Recommendations for the following documents

would be better as

the Group may also produce W3C Recommendation-track documents for the following documents

(not a blocker, just think it is clearer)

siusin commented 8 months ago

It was mentioned in TPAC that the ARIA in HTML spec might need to go to the ARIA WG - this will require a CfC in the group.

siusin commented 8 months ago

Minor point: maybe

the Group may also produce W3C Recommendations for the following documents

would be better as

the Group may also produce W3C Recommendation-track documents for the following documents

(not a blocker, just think it is clearer)

Done. Thanks! -> https://www.w3.org/2023/10/webappswg-charter-2023.html#wicgspecs

siusin commented 8 months ago

at the top of section 2 (or 2.1), there might be better to have a pointer to section 12? like, draft state etc. mentioned in description at section 2 are only listed in section 12, but not in section 2.

There was actually a reference in 2.4, but I added another ref in 2.1 anyway. Thanks. -> https://www.w3.org/2023/10/webappswg-charter-2023.html#normative

plehegar commented 3 months ago

Announced