Charter 2023

[chrisn]

The current MEIG charter expires on 30 April 2023. This PR is for a new charter for 2023-2025.

We welcome your feedback, comments, and suggestions on the group's priorities for the next charter period. Please feel free to raise issues in GitHub or comment in this PR.

HTML preview

[chrisn]

We currently have Media Integration Guidelines listed as a draft deliverable. Should we still plan to work on this? If not, we should probably remove it from the charter.

@JohnRiv @fghilardi

[JohnRiv]

We currently have Media Integration Guidelines listed as a draft deliverable. Should we still plan to work on this? If not, we should probably remove it from the charter.

Although it disappoints me to type this because we did a good amount of research for that note, I don't see that being a priority in the next 2 years that this renewed charter will be active, so I'd recommend we remove it.

I'd still keep the repo around since there is valuable information in the issues to work from if we were to restart that effort.

[chrisn]

Thank you, and I agree it's sad to drop this, we had some good input. Of course, we're open to restarting work if there's interest.

[chrisn]

Would it be helpful to rephrase "tighter support" to something more specific? For example, "achieve a tighter support" in the mission statement could be "to improve support for current and future media related applications and services on the Web".

[chrisn]

The Success Criteria section emphasizes mailing list participation, As we more often use GitHub for discussion, I suggest amending bullets 1 and 4 to mention GitHub (as well as the mailing list).

[nigelmegitt]

Would it be helpful to rephrase "tighter support" to something more specific? For example, "achieve a tighter support" in the mission statement could be "to improve support for current and future media related applications and services on the Web".

Might be worth clarifying the intent of the members here: is it to improve compliance of implementations with existing specs, to improve the feature set within specs, or a bit of both?

[chrisn]

As co-chairs, we are interested to hear wider member feedback. My own view is that it's a bit of both, and can also include proposing where new specs are needed if there are gaps.

[chrisn]

The proposed updated mission statement would be:

"The mission of the Media and Entertainment Interest Group is to provide a forum for media-related technical discussions to track progress of media features on the Web within W3C groups and use of Web technologies by external organizations, and to identify use cases and requirements that existing and/or new specifications need to meet to improve support for current and future media related applications and services on the Web"

[chrisn]

@nigelmegitt I think the points you raised may be covered already in the Success Criteria section. Is this OK as is or do you think we need to make a change? We have:

• "Engagement and coordination with other organizations in the media industry to promote adherence to W3C standards"

and

• "Identification of requirements for improved support of media-centric applications on the Web platform, possibly through the creation of Task Forces"
• "Incubation of technical solutions for the identified requirements by supporting the creation of or discussion in existing Community Groups or Business Groups focusing on particular topics"

[nigelmegitt]

@chrisn I agree. I'll suggest an editorial improvement too.