Consider documenting the path from standardization to incubation

[anssiko]

For symmetry, have you considered documenting the transition of a specification from a Working Group to a Community Group?

If this direction would be well specified (signals to look for, policy/CLA considerations, etc.), I believe it might in fact encourage incubation efforts to transition to standardization in a timely manner knowing the conditions under which there's a path back to incubation within the W3C community.

I think this would help establish a CG <-> WG continuum and as such encourage broader participation in Working Groups when combined with the proposed Support for continued participation in a Working Group by CG contributors.

This would be especially helpful for Working Groups that have sister Community Groups that act as their domain-specific incubators (example) with good overlap in participation.

[ianbjacobs]

@anssiko thank you for raising this. Can you say more about scenarios where a WG sends work to a CG? Some ideas that come to mind:

• Hey CG, we took up your work but realize that a few parts of the Spec need more work. Would you mind fixing those parts?
• Hey CG, we're doing fine on version 1 and urge you to make progress on v2. Please start with this draft as the basis for v2.

Those may or may not be the scenarios you had in mind. I'd like to use this issue to capture patterns we'd want to address. Thanks!

[csarven]

Perhaps another:

• Hey CG, we went down a rabbit hole and tried to boil the ocean, but we lack the incubation and experience within our charter. You may want to work on this for a future WG.

[anssiko]

All those three are patterns I’ve come across.

The cost of rechartering a WG with an expanded scope is another consideration.

[tidoust]

Documenting a different use case, with some overlap on establishing a CG <-> WG continuum.

This follows from a recent discussion in the Media Working Group. The Pausing iframe media when not visible is a media-related proposal which, if successful, would end up being specified as updates to the HTML spec in WHATWG. The WICG seems the right place to incubate the feature (and the plan is indeed to start incubating in the WICG).

Although nothing prevents it in theory, the WICG does not provide a practical setting for engaging with the right set of media experts. The Media Working Group could provide that setting. But it makes little sense for the Media WG to adopt a new deliverable and publish it on the Rec track. That would just make the final transfer to the WHATWG more difficult. Using the Media WG as venue for progressing incubation work in the WICG is awkward as well.