Does incubation rise to the level of Vision?

[martinthomson]

There's a bullet point for Incubation in the Vision? Or is this better under a different title. I fear that the recent focus of the AB on incubation as a mechanism is either obscuring a more substantive issue or creating an item that does not belong on the same level as the other things.

Suggestion 1: Remove the bullet point entirely.
Suggestion 2: Give the bullet point a different title, one that focuses on the acquisition of new work for the organization.

I have a slight preference for the removal option. The relevance of the organization does depend on getting new work in, but this needs to be rooted in a technical vision, not an operational one.

[cwilso]

As per #220, I do think this principle is about much more than just a mechanism; it's about a recognition that the Web isn't done and it should continue to evolve, we should encourage that evolution, but that it must be done with caution and collaboration. I would not be in favor of removal.

[cwilso]

chair+editors have strong view this should be included.

[fantasai]

Maybe it helps to explain the principle better? For example, how would you write the description of this principle if you couldn't use the word "incubation" in its own definition?

[cwilso]

With @fantasai 's comment in mind, I edited the description of the incubation principle as a proposal in #236. I do want to call out that the point of incubation is to be cautious and responsible in how we innovate in the web platform; it is not that we explicitly are attempting to acquire new work (a la #143).

I would recommend optionally taking the PR in #236, and closing this issue. I would object to removing the principle altogether.

[martinthomson]

I think that #236 changes the focus in about the right way. I still have a problem with the jargon though. Can we use human words for the concept we really want to talk about? (Responsible development of new platform capabilities.)

[fantasai]

+1 to @martinthomson's suggestion for s/breadth/capabilities/ fwiw.

[cwilso]

With #247 (review), AB resolved to close.