Re: Reported to Social Web WG

Thanks, Doug!

I wanted to chime in on the JSON-LD context thread, but this is probably a
good place, too. I believe the Social Web WG has also discussed the
part-of-speech issue in the context of the AS2 vocabulary classification of
activities.

I'd like to encourage anyone who has the bandwidth to at least lurk in that
WG as I think there's room for a lot more coordination there.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:31 AM Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hey, folks–
>
> I happened to join the Social Web WG telcon a few minutes ago. (I'm
> technically a member of the WG, but I don't track them closely and
> almost never attend their telcons, but I saw that they were meeting and
> on impulse joined the telcon.)
>
> Opportunistically, Harry (their staff contact) asked me to report on the
> Web Annotation WG in the last 5 minutes of the call.
>
> I told them about the different specs we've got in draft form (data
> model, Annotation Protocol, RangeFinder API), and told them we're set
> for a FPWD on Annotation Protocol. I reiterated that we want to make
> sure that there's no conflicts between our deliverables.
>
> They were especially interested in the Annotation Protocol, since
> there's possible intersection/overlap with the SoLiD (Social Linked
> Data) protocol, one of their possible deliverables. They said they'd
> provide feedback on Annotation Protocol.
>
> Nothing much else was said on that topic; it was just a heads-up.
>
> Regarding the rest of their telcon, you can read the minutes, but to me
> as an outsider lending only half an ear, it mostly seemed like
> procedural stuff, regarding goals on publication around the
> ActivityStreams 2 spec. There was also discussion about
> internationalization in AS2, regarding multiple bodies (one for each
> language).
>
> Regards–
> –Doug
>
>