Participants

Questions

What is the role of working groups given the ongoing maturation of projects in HL?
- Prescriptive: the working groups prescribe direction for projects
- Descriptive: working groups generalize what is already being done in the projects
- Gap analysis: identify "what's missing" from the current projects
- Integration analysis: identify "common components" that could be extracted
- Emerging trends-vision: Provide a platform for "vision" of what is out there in the field. New ideas from members. Reports from influential conferences/meetings
- Platform for launch: we had Indy/Aries launched from ID WG, Caliper from PSWG
How can working groups provide appropriate "recompense" for participation? Influence, notoriety, creativity, business value?
How else can we motivate (or at least reduce the barrier) to participation?
What is the process for report outs? Historically, the white paper, architecture, and performance working groups completed documents that were brought to the TSC for final review and approval. This seems like a reasonable model and should be standardized.