Editorial - Business SC Updates #107
Conversation
| <h4 id="renewable-evidence">Success Criterion: Renewable evidence</h4> | ||
| <p class="external"><a class="machine" href="https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/star.html#BSPM01-6">Machine-testable</a> <span class="hide">and </span><a class="urls" href="https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/resources.html#BSPM01-6">Resources</a></p> | ||
| <p>The organization can show how it powers digital products and services with renewable energy.</p> | ||
| <p>Demonstrate how digital products and services are powered using renewable energy.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want to say "carbon free energy" here, or some other term that won't upset people in regions that might be running mostly nuclear?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with this. As this will apply to multiple criteria I'll make a note to implement this change along with the globally applying changes.
| <h4 id="competitor-impact">Success Criterion: Competitor impact</h4> | ||
| <p class="external"><a class="machine" href="https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/star.html#BSPM05-2">Machine-testable</a> <span class="hide">and </span><a class="urls" href="https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/resources.html#BSPM05-2">Resources</a></p> | ||
| <p>The environmental impact of your or a competitor's current service to inform decision-making (as a potential target goal) has been calculated.</p> | ||
| <p>Calculate the environmental impact of your or a competitor's current service to inform decision-making targets.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lol do we really want to encourage this, and how feasible is it for my organisation to calculate a competitors impact?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an interesting question and one I've been considering for a while.
I think as a W3C group we have to set the guidelines to push for best practices (the WHAT and WHY) even if the HOW may not be entirely set in stone yet. If there's one thing we know from the web industry, it's that stuff doesn't tend to get done unless it can be automated onto tooling. Web Sustainability draws a lot of parallels with Web Accessibility in that trying to calculate is difficult, but the hope is that tooling will improve to a point that being able to more easily identify (at least a good portion) of issues will be able to give you a relative idea of impact with reasonable accuracy in the future. This won't work for everything - and certainly not all the SCs will qualify but there will be things you should be able to determine to draw comparisons.
That being said, if it is totally unrealistic to examine parts of your competitors impact to drive an organisation to improve it could be nominated for removal.
This contains the editorial updates for the Business & Product Success Criteria of the spec.
Some corrective changes from the original intent were made but these appear to be non-destructive and improve the quality and rationale behind the SC. Those of note are listed below:
Lead editorial credit: @codewordcreative
Helpful Note(s):
Further changes will likely be made/required to this content to ensure it meets measurability criteria, etc.
A preview of this pull request can be seen by clicking the diff button below and if you use the "full-document" link at the base of the spec you can navigate all the changes more easily using the available < and > buttons.
Preview | Diff