Marketing Minutes 2007-01-09

From MemberWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

URL: http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/Marketing_Minutes_2007-01-09

Contents

[edit]

OpenAjax Alliance Marketing Committee meeting minutes 2007-01-09

[edit]

Attendees

  • Thomas Stoesser <Thomas.Stoesser(at)softwareag.com>
  • Jim Driscoll <jim.driscoll(at)sun.com>
  • David Frankel <david.frankel(at)sap.com>
  • Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai(at)us.ibm.com>
  • Theo Beack <Tbeack(at)bea.com>
  • Matt Herdon <matth(at)activestate.com>
  • Alexei White <awhite(at)nitobi.com>
  • Andre Charland <andre.charland(at)nitobi.com>
  • Joseph Becker <bjoseph(at)us.ibm.com>
  • Sharat Chander <sharat.chander(at)sun.com>
[edit]

Original Agenda

[edit]

Minutes

[edit]

Topic: News from Interoperability Committee and Open Source project at SourceForge

(Jon describes the above)

Thomas: No best practices yet. How long will they take?

Jon: Not sure, but 90% likely that these will evolve over time and slowly. This is something we have to do deliberately. We want to make sure there is true industry consensus. We don't want a couple of companies to ram through their opinions without making sure everyone else agrees.

Thomas: Agree. So, if no BP defined, we can ignore BP for now?

Jon: Yes.

DavidF: Plans for different levels of conformance?

Jon: Haven't decided yet. Other standards have multiple levels. Seems likely we will have multiple levels too.

DavidF: But current language sounds binary.

Jon: I need to clean up the language and say something about the possibility of multiple levels. (NOTE: Added placeholder language at: http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/OpenAjax_Conformance#Multiple_Conformance_Levels)

DavidF: Technical question. Does it make sense to conform to the Hub but maybe not the Registry?

Jon: Simple answer is that they are independent and it would make sense to support the Hub even if you don't support the Registry.

DavidF: Suggests natural conformance levels.

DavidF: Usually a spec has the conformance criteria separated out from the definition of the APIs.

Jon: My initial reaction to this suggestion is positive, but let me think about it.

(Jon points everyone to draft wiki page that defines "OpenAjax Conformance")

Theo: How does certification work?

Jon: We have discussed this in the past. With OpenAjax, we aren't going to do any certification. Instead, we will follow a model similar to W3C where our spec define conformance requirements, vendors can claim conformance, and it is up to the industry to police the vendors.

Theo: Can get complex with versions.

Jon: Yes. Because of this we need to try our best to keep things as simple as possible because there will be enough complexity without us adding more complexity.

DavidF: Looking at the conformance page, that is a good start at having a separate conformance section. On the right track.


[edit]

Topic: Marketing WG proposal and charter in 2nd half of January - per our Development Process

(Jon mentions that both Interop and Mktg groups need to work on their charters, but not in earnest until Development Process is approved. No questions were raised.)


[edit]

Topic: What should we try to have ready and announce by AJAXWorld (March 19-21)?

  • What should we try to have ready and announce by AJAXWorld (March 19-21)?
  • What should be nature of InteroperabilityFest on second day of our face-to-face (March 22-23)?
    • Proposal: Interoperability event has two aspects
      • A: One standard test skeleton (HTML+JS) that verifies conformance with Hub.
        • Toolkit suppliers need to modify test skeleton to load their libraries (which have been tweaked to be OpenAjax Conformant)
        • The test will print CONFORMANCE TEST PASSED multiple times in response to:
          • library invokes OpenAjax.registerLibrary()
          • library invokes OpenAjax.registerGlobals()
          • library invokes OpenAjax.addOnLoadEvent()
          • Event hub not disrupted
          • Markup scanner not disrupted
      • B: Vendors encouraged to brag about demonstrating integration of multiple Ajax toolkits by leveraging Hub
    • Set low expectations:
      • Claim victory if we get a handful of companies to participate (even if they don't pass)
      • But shoot for demos of some actual interoperability

DavidF: Maybe the interoperability event isn't an event. Is it a discussion?

Jon: Still an open question. Two possible approaches come to mind: (1) People do their work beforehand, and we just meet to talk about who succeeded, (2) We have an all-day hands-on meeting where people get the tests to work and we fix things in real-time.

Thomas: Prefer option (1). Do preparation work beforehand. Won't be able to send multiple people. Maybe only me, and I'm mainly marketing.

Jon: Makes total sense to me. Any other opinions, or are there other approaches?

DavidF: Looks like a reasonable goal. We can try this out. Maybe can use the time to iron out problems.

Jon: From a marketing perspective, I recommend that we low-key the event.

DavidF: Tend to agree.

Jon: Joe?

Joe: Generally speaking, the press will be keen to know about new members, accomplishments, goals for 2007, what are the takeaways from the March meeting. If anything comes from Hub or interop event, they will be well-received,, but press focus is largely on member growth.

Jon: So I am hearing we don't need to promote this event in the March timeframe to maintain positive press. Thus, we should put our focus on the interop event on simply achieving interop versus attempting to leverage this for publicity.

Joe: Most of the interop event will be too technical for 99% of the press.

DavidF: Announce things afterwards. Can issue press release on progress.

Joe: Yes. As much content to show how we have progressed will be interesting and good info for a press release. But we will want to put out a press release no matter what.

Jon: So, when we have a positive result, let's talk about it, but not until that positive result occurs.

Joe: Interop Fest is only one component of what we will talk about.

Matt: What might work. Mainly a technical day. Some companies work beforehand but others work during the event. Then summarize the results at the end of the day.

Jon: Yes, maybe. One thing is that we have to balance 3 main things we want to accomplish across a meeting that only has 2 days. The 3 things are: (1) General meetings. Lots to talk about there. Lots of things have happened. 2 committees. 4 task forces. And most members haven't been paying full attention to what is going on. (2) Breakout meetings for the committees and task forces. (3) The Interop event.

?: When would the interop test case be available?

Jon: I can commit to having something for our next meeting in two weeks. Maybe sooner, but certainly in 2 weeks.


[edit]

Topic: 2nd Generation White Papers

Jon: I promised to have drafts for today. I sort of have drafts, but I realized there was more work that needed to be done.

DavidF: Need help now or prefer to finish the drafts and then get help later?

Jon: I would prefer to finish the drafts and then get help. I can do this in time for the next meeting.

Retrieved from "http://www.openajaxalliance.org/member/wiki/Marketing_Minutes_2007-01-09"
Personal tools