Structure/Process for Working Groups #8064
jqnatividad
started this conversation in
Ideas
Replies: 1 comment
-
Hi @jqnatividad thanks for sharing. We need these working groups so that we might implement result of these activities at the send part of 2024. I like W3C process document for it comprehensiveness. It's not exactly what you asked for, rather a thinking pieces around CoP: https://hbr.org/2000/01/communities-of-practice-the-organizational-frontier and https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/communities-practice-advancing-ways-people-together-7840 . |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
As part of Phase II of the NSF POSE project (https://civicdataecosystem.org) for CKAN, we proposed to convene several "communities of practice" to work on key initiatives (e.g. DCAT 3, Water Data standards, etc.), with POSE providing the necessary "scaffolding" to support these communities/working groups.
One idea is to follow the W3C protocol as described in detail here:
https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20231103/
One concern with the W3C protocol is that it may be too "heavy-weight".
Another is to use a process similar to Rust's Request for Comments process:
https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0002-rfc-process.html
A concern with the Rust process is that its targeted to "technical" issues.
Are there any other processes/protocols that can be considered to allow both technical and non-technical Subject Matter Experts to participate?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions