W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-social-web-talk@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Poll: Who would join Social Web XG(s)? 1 or 2 XGs? Telecons?

From: Vincent M. Zegna <v.zegna@sonetdigital.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:32:10 +0000
Message-ID: <497DAD4A.5070503@sonetdigital.com>
To: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
Hi All

I am AC rep at W3C for another company, outside of this I am also a 
principle owner at myJournal (http://myjournal.com) an business/social 
network system that is in semi-live-BETA being tested. It is built on 
the Wordpress MU platform that has been extensively re-written.

We would be more than happy to join the Social Web XG and can bring 
user-feedback and expectations of social networking systems in an 
business environment to the table.

Not sure about attending workshops in the near future but if it is 
feasible we would attend.

Thanks

Vincent

Vincent Zegna

E: v.zegna@sonetdigital.com
W: http://myjournal.com
T: +44(0)1202 510397




Peter Ferne wrote:
>
>
> On 23 Jan 2009, at 16:43, Harry Halpin wrote:
>> Two quick questions - please respond to list if possible!
>>
>> 1) Who would join the Social Web XG? Please add if you are a W3C member
>> or not, and if your organization would join W3C.
>
> Probably, though the time I could devote would be limited. Not a W3C 
> member and not likely to become one. We are an angel funded startup.
>
>> 2) Would you prefer one or two XGs? One XG focused on interoperability
>> between exisiting work on the social web, and another focused on Best
>> Practices? Or should these be done as one XG?
>
> Two, for tighter focus.
>
>> 3) Regardless of one or two XGs, different telecons but same listserv to
>> facilitate communication? Or one telecon?
>
> Different telecons.
>
> Unfortunately I haven't met most of you as I wasn't able to attend the 
> workshop a the last moment due to other commitments.
> -- 
> Peter Ferne,  +44 (0)7970 942 261,  petef@jivatechnology.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus 
> signature database 3800 (20090126) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 12:33:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:51:47 UTC