Agenda for Dec 22 meeting

[foolip]

Here's the agenda for our meeting on Thursday, Dec 22:

• 2022 Investigation project scores are incomplete #252. All 3 updated in draft PRs:
  • Interop 2022: update viewport investigation score wpt.fyi#3084
  • Interop 2022: update pointer investigation score wpt.fyi#3085
  • Interop 2022: update editing investigation score wpt.fyi#3086
• Dashboard design

Yep, that's it. A somewhat light attendance is expected.

Previous meeting: #254

[nairnandu]

Brief notes:

Agenda: #257

Attendees: @foolip, @gsnedders, @jensimmons, @jgraham, @meyerweb, @nairnandu, @ntlm

Notes:

• Investigation project scores - Reviewed all 3 PRs today and consensus on moving forward.
  • Interop 2022: update viewport investigation score wpt.fyi#3084
  • Interop 2022: update pointer investigation score wpt.fyi#3085
  • Interop 2022: update editing investigation score wpt.fyi#3086
  • 2022 investigation efforts would be archived in the 2022 page. These are time-boxed.
• Dashboard design and weighting
  • [jensimmons@] Prefer to list all active areas together followed by active investigations. Completed focus areas and investigations can be captured separately. Show an “Interop score” (the lowest common denominator) and “Investigations score”
  • [jgraham@] Interop and Investigation scores make sense. For year based scoring (“Active focus areas”) - the concern is that we will have an ever growing backlog of things we focus on.
  • [foolip@] Active vs completed - This would potentially help us to be more intentional about getting areas to completion.
    Consensus on rounding the high level scores. Focus areas and investigations will show the decimal value.
  • [jensimmons@] Weighting proposal - more weighting assigned to areas that have lower “Interop” scores
  • [jgraham@] a good thing about focus areas is that it’s not a huge bucket that you can’t make progress on (when talking to engineering teams). I’d like some curation.
  • [jensimmons@] I don’t think we have the time or energy to debate each focus area in detail, weighting up or down.
  • [jgraham@] I wish we had explicitly proposed 2022 carryovers, so people could take that into account when planning.
  • [jensimmons@] one proposal was making the 15 old focus areas 30% and the new 70%.
  • [jgraham@] I don’t think we should do that. No “overall Interop score for all of history”
  • [jensimmons@] What I’m hearing is you wish we didn’t have as many areas. We didn’t cut down on the focus areas that were tentatively accepted.
  • [jgraham@] This might work this year with 28 focus areas, but when we get to 50 I don’t think it will, it’ll be a giant bucket of failures, with no guidance.
  • [nt1m@] could we have a fixed number of focus areas, so we have to complete focus areas in order to take on new ones?
  • [foolip@] I like that idea. Also can we carry forward fewer focus areas, not everything in 2021+2022? Maybe not scrolling.
  • [jgraham@] Also like that idea. “Completed” wording might be problematic. Perhaps “inactive”, and then people can challenge us and say it’s still important. This bridges the gap between some of the proposals I think.
  • [jensimmons@] I like that we can decide which things we’re going to bring. We need to set up meetings with internal teams.