3-Stage Standards Process: Guaranteeing an open and decentralized ecosystem

Further clarifying 3-stage Standards Process

In FEP Process - Clarity on positioning: open and inclusive - #8 I collected feedback on the FEP process. The way I picture the FEP Process’ role as the 2nd-stage in a 3-stage standards process is:

  • Just one way how things from the ecosystem permeate bottom-up to further standardization.
    • The FEP process need not be used. Entirely optional.
    • Ecosystem can directly participate with W3C.
    • Ecosystem can define their own practices & standards (think e.g. ForgeFed)
  • FEP’s can be:
    • informative (ideas, good practices)
    • specialized (domain-specific)
    • recommended practices (when well-defined, tested, implemented)
  • FEP’s are a handy way to:
    • inform the decentralized ecosystem (“where I can find common/popular ways of doing things”)
    • inform the W3C on what to cherry-pick for further adoption (likely recommended practices)
  • SocialHub merely facilitates. SocialHub is just a community, part of the ecosystem.
    • Task of FEP editors is to minimize gatekeeping.
    • Editors are responsible for process, not content.
  • SocialHub liaisons with W3C.
    • Bottom-up. How can we help W3C evolve the standards? Inform by the FEP + discussions.
    • Top-down. How can we help W3C open standards adoption? Follow-up to W3C activity.

All this depicted in the following diagram:

(Note: Excalidraw diagram definition is included, picture can be opened/edited in the UI)


@codenamedmitri @eprodrom your feedback would be much appreciated from the perspective of W3C.

4 Likes