There are a few things I'd like to discuss, mainly things that are giving the impression that the WG has some extra power over the Eclipse Platform or other Eclipse projects, which are already governed by the EDP independently of the working group. The WG goals are IMO to be focused on the ecosystem and the "product" (ie pages and other content that is not part of an Eclipse project) and its marketing, not on the projects. Specifically:
* "Provide governance [...] for the development of [...]": I think the EDP does cover governance of development and WG has to clearly not be involved in that part. The WG can govern some other aspects (some funding and so on), but it's as far as I understand not intended to nor capable of governance of project development.
the number and/or frequency of commits by engaging and incentivizing
committers and community members working on the Eclipse IDE platform": this seems a bit too fine grained and only focusing on numbers (which are not a quality metric). For a strategic objective, I believe something more vague like "Stiumulate and grow the ecosystem of contributors to the Eclipse IDE and Platform". Things like number of commits and diversity of contributors can be KPIs for that objective.,..
* "Improve the user-friendliness and UX of the Eclipse platform for a better end-user experience." : I also think this is a bit too specific. Something like "Identify work items that seems most profitable to end-users and influence Eclipse IDE projects to prioritize them". Note than maybe "end-users" need to be clarified here, to ensure people think about the same targets. Maybe it would be nice to identify some personas to define the end-users and more easily communicate about them with the projects.