[vwrap] Status and future of the VWRAP working group

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

Good day, all.
The chairs and area directors have been talking about the status and
future of the VWRAP working group.  Owing to changes in focus and
commitment by both companies and individuals, things have been
languishing, and it's not clear to us that we have what we need to get
the chartered work done.  The introduction document looked close to
ready, until some controversy on its content and direction brewed, and
the result of that discussion was inconclusive.  The normative drafts
that have seen some implementation (type system, launch message, etc.)
also appear nearly technically complete, but some issues have been
identified and not resolved by subsequent discussion, consensus, and
editing.

At this point, the mailing list has been too quiet for too long, all
the draft documents have expired, and we need to make a decision about
what to do.

The chairs and ADs see three possibilities:

1. Find new document editors, pick up the chartered work with the
existing document base, and get moving again.  Get the introduction
document finished by the end of February, and make progress on the
others.

2. Come to consensus on significant changes to the direction of the
VWRAP specs, find new document editors, revamp the introduction
document, and get that finished, or substantially so, by the end of
February.  Have some clear consensus, clear direction, and enthusiasm
to continue.  Consider rechartering, if the direction has changed
enough to require that.

3. Accept that we no longer have enough core participation, consensus,
and enthusiasm to make progress, and close the working group.  Future
work in the virtual world area could charter a new working group
later.

Note that options 1 and 2 both require that we demonstrate sufficient
energy and participation to really get work done and to demonstrate
consensus.  That means that we need people to commit to
writing/editing documents, actively discussing the technical issues
with the goal of reaching consensus on the content of the documents,
and, importantly, reviewing documents and showing that we have
consensus.  Three or four participants isn't enough, and conflicting
ideas that can't be resolved into a consensus-based position won't
work.

What say you, VWRAP participants?  Can we pick up the work and make
progress?  Shall we close the working group, and perhaps consider
something in future?  Do you favour options 1, 2, or 3?  Or do you see
an alternative option you'd like to bring up?

Barry and Joshua, VWRAP chairs