[ig/wai] WAI IG recharter

[shawna-slh]

Charter Review

Charter

Diff from charter template

Diff from previous charter

Chair dashboard

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

• Existing IG recharter
  If this is a charter extension or revision, link a coming later diff from previous charter, and any issue discussion: none.

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

Communities suggested for outreach

None at this time.

Known or potential areas of concern

None at this time.

This is request for an extension of the existing charter so we can propose a new charter. We don't expect any substantive changes to that charter.

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? (this strategy funnel issue, a different github repo, email, ...)

https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/issues?q=in%3Atitle%20ig%2Fwai

Anything else we should think about as we review?

The new charter extends the group for three years and aligns with the latest charter template. There are no other material changes.

[plehegar]

Group has been extended
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2024JanMar/0000.html

[shawna-slh]

Given the group is not wanting to do work beyond email discussions right now, and there are no substantive changes to the group or next charter, other work has taken priority over creating and processing a new charter. It remains on the To Do list...

[shawna-slh]

Updated charter for 2025

[shawna-slh]

I assume charter shepherd is @iadawn

[iadawn]

Charter changed to be for two years

[nitedog]

is it actually necessary to have a charter, to continue running this mailing list? many moons ago, this group held face-to-face meetings and had more engagement efforts that made a charter necessary. i'm not opposed, just wondering if such a charter is still needed.

[himorin]

No comment or request from i18n

[ruoxiran]

No comment or request from APA

[shawna-slh]

many moons ago, this group held face-to-face meetings and had more engagement efforts that made a charter necessary. i'm not opposed, just wondering if such a charter is still needed.

@nitedog The moon is rising again. :) We are working on a potential hybrid meeting soon and more engagement later this year. We'd like to charter for another 2-year period so we have it in place as we refine engagement through the Interest Group.

[simoneonofri]

No comment from Security

[dontcallmedom]

The "Motivation and Background" talks mostly about the mailing list, so maybe to address questions similar to @nitedog 's one above, it may be useful to explain a bit more the expected role of the IG as meeting host as well.

[plehegar]

"This Interest Group does not develop deliverables." Do you only really wish to prevent the IG from even publishing Group Notes? The W3C Process already prevents the IG from publishing Rec-track documents.

[plehegar]

Section 5.1 W3C Groups:
[[

• Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (AG WG)
• Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group (APA WG)
• ARIA Working Group (ARIA WG)
• Internationalization Working Group
  ]]

This list a few W3C Groups without given a rational for listing them. While I can understand that the WAI Groups are listed since the IG will review and raise of their deliverables. Does it do the same with the i18n Core WG?

[shawna-slh]

Thank you for the input. We addressed comments with w3c/charter-drafts#668

We held a WAI IG session in May. (We didn't get it organized in time to be a formal meeting.) We will share the link to the recording after the captions are done.

We are exploring two options for hybrid meetings later this year, including W3C TPAC.

We will process this and request AC review soon.

CC @iadawn @plehegar

[jyasskin]

[Google hat rather than TAG hat]
Along the lines of @nitedog's comment, could most of this IG turn into a Community Group (which would continue to operate the existing mailing list), and the other bits merge into APA? Looking at the deliverables in the proposed charter, the APA already "reviews deliverables of other Groups" via its horizontal reviews, and it already maintains several WAI resources. If there's a worry that some valuable people can participate in an IG but not in a WG, they can still participate in the CG and comment on the APA's HR issues, and I'd encourage the APA to make them invited experts to attend review meetings.

[shawna-slh]

replies in w3c/charter-drafts#669 (comment)

[matatk]

TAG doesn't have any architectural concerns regarding this charter.