Workgroup categories

With the addition of User Groups, our current categorization scheme (which I’m not attached to) is becoming a bit inflexible to handle the various types of Workgroups on our site.

I’d like to explore a more fluid, reusable, multi-category (or … tags? flags?) scheme to describe our Workgroups.

Some things that I think need to be called out:

• “Technical” vs “non-technical”. Per our governance, this is whether or not the WG develops a specification. Another way to look at it is User Groups + StC vs the rest.
• (eventually) @OASIS vs not
• At one point we had an “ALM”/”PLM” distinction, but I think that’s a more flexible instead of an either/or thing
• Administrative vs, uh, not. (Just the Steering Committee)
• User Group or not (see also technical/non-technical)
• Multi-workgroup concerns (many groups share a focus on, eg analysis, performance, defects, requirements)
• …more?

Ground rules:

• Would prefer that the name of a workgroup is not a tag. So the Core group can’t be tagged “Core”. This is mostly because it would look silly, but I imagine there will be exceptions.
• We probably want to max out at 5–7 tags just to keep the display manageable. I know this is a good place to dump buzzwords, but let’s try to avoid that

Here’s a first pass: