W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > April 2015

Re: Webplatform Facebook Group

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:24:59 -0400
Message-ID: <553117BB.3070008@w3.org>
To: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>
CC: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Sounds like a good idea. Could we do that for both Facebook and G+?

On 4/17/15 9:27 AM, PhistucK wrote:
> Should there be a bot that collects the posts and comments and publishes
> them on a mailing list (and maybe also the other way around)?
>
>
> ☆*PhistucK*
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:56 AM, abhimanyu0003
> <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org <mailto:abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>> wrote:
>
>     __
>     Thanks for accepting this proposal. G+ is not better than Facebook,
>     they're both the same (with Facebook's membership times more than
>     G+'). There are many technical groups on Facebook too, you probably
>     have just not looked. Their differences don't matter, they're both
>     the same.
>
>     I also agree that we need proper marketing and publicising but
>     first, we'll need to make the group active and add as many members
>     from WPD as we can. Here's the URL, so if you have a Facebook
>     account, just visit it.
>
>     https://www.facebook.com/groups/WebPlatformOfficial/
>
>     I could publicise it in appropriate places, but I'm not sure that
>     will be very helpful when we've just begun. First we have to
>     establish some authority, so that when people look, they know that
>     we mean serious content. A new group won't give that impression, so
>     let's stay away from publicising right now (however, we can use
>     technical forums to target aspiring members saying that we're new
>     and need members, that'll be a totally different thing).
>
>     ---
>     </Abhimanyu>
>
>
>     ---- On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:54:05 +0530 *Doug Schepers
>     <schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>* wrote ----
>
>         Hi, Russell–
>
>         I tend agree with you that G+ might be a better place to get
>         high-quality contributions, but I'm open to anything that helps
>         build an
>         maintain the contributor community.
>
>         I like what you're saying about marketing and publicity. Are you
>         interested in helping brainstorm and drive that?
>
>         Regards–
>         –Doug
>
>         On 4/16/15 10:41 PM, Russell wrote:
>          > Hi All,
>          >
>          > I've been eavesdropping for a while and finally thought I
>         would throw in
>          > my two cents on this. Probably more like two hundred cents..
>          >
>          > I think the group needs a lot more exposure, but I am worried
>         that a
>          > Facebook group could bring in a lot of bad submissions. Is
>         there an easy
>          > way to manage non-serious submissions? I have seen much more
>         of a
>          > programmer / IT community on G+, so I would throw in my vote
>         for that
>          > before Facebook, but we still have the potential for the same
>         problem.
>          > Twitter could be even better, but there is already a web
>         platform
>          > account, it just doesn't seem to be doing much evangelism.
>          >
>          > Either way, we definitely need a core group of individuals
>         dedicated to
>          > marketing and publicity if this project is going to take off
>         like it
>          > needs to. I remember hearing about the webplatform when it
>         first started
>          > up and remember the excitement within myself and my fellow
>         developers,
>          > but I don't think anyone really remembers anything about it
>         until they
>          > randomly stumble upon it again. All the devs I know use MDN,
>         Dash,
>          > devdocs.io <http://devdocs.io> <http://devdocs.io>, or
>         whatwg. I find myself using those
>          > more often too, as webplatform doesn't seem to have the
>         "umph" needed to
>          > take over.
>          >
>          > Part of this is because webplatform rarely shows on Google
>         results.
>          > Webplatform.org does not rank anywhere close to MDN and we
>         are not
>          > showing for the most common of css/html/javascript searches.
>         We need to
>          > hit Google's front-page, and thinking about it more now, I
>         think that is
>          > most important. Let's make all the groups.
>          >
>          > Have we worked on SEO at all? Is anyone pointing to
>         webplatform.org <http://webplatform.org>
>          > <http://webplatform.org>'s site when answering stackoverflow
>         questions?
>          >
>          >
>          > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:13 PM Doug Schepers
>         <schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>
>          > <mailto:schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>> wrote:
>          >
>          > Hi, Abhimanyu–
>          >
>          > Okay, let's explore this idea again. I admit to being
>         skeptical, but if
>          > you think it will help get more contributors, and to keep
>         contributors
>          > active, then I'm open to at least testing it.
>          >
>          > What do you suggest for next steps?
>          >
>          > Regards–
>          > –Doug
>          >
>          > On 4/12/15 3:26 AM, abhimanyu0003 wrote:
>          > > I recommended months ago of having a solid third-party,
>         somewhat
>          > > clutter-ish and compromised portal: an open Facebook group.
>          > >
>          > > I love the WPD and it'll one of the best technical projects
>         in the
>          > > future, but my other priorities are so easy to get my hands
>         into,
>          > while
>          > > contributing and discussing WPD work is non-modern.
>          > >
>          > > An open Facebook group will mean our attention being
>         diverted to WPD
>          > > more frequently and have much more members (an open group
>         is seen by
>          > > friends ofall members, thus increasing our visibility and
>         getting
>          > more
>          > > enthusiastic contributors).
>          > >
>          > > ---
>          > > &#60;/Abhimanyu&#62;
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > ---- On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 04:19:12 +0530 *aaa@bzfx.net
>         <mailto:aaa@bzfx.net>
>          > <mailto:aaa@bzfx.net <mailto:aaa@bzfx.net>>* wrote ----
>          > >
>          > > Have we reached out to see how we can be more accommodating?i
>          > >
>          > > I'd much prefer not using a vendor-specific, or even
>          > > vendor-controlled, source.
>          > >
>          > > Austin.
>          > >
>          > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:46 AM, PhistucK
>         <phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>
>          > <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>>
>          > > <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>
>         <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>          > >
>          > > While it is not dead, some vendors (or a single vendor?) are
>          > > instructing their members to prefer
>          > >
>          >
>         <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/RNk93vpOaV8/2_hw97dJ0NQJ>
>
>          > > other
>          > >
>          >
>         <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/RNk93vpOaV8/fhNVU0s8DCQJ>
>
>          > > documentation venues.
>          > > To me, this is really sad.
>          > >
>          > > Perhaps you can do something about it?
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > ☆*PhistucK*
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Jonathan Garbee
>          > > <jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me>
>         <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me>>
>          > <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me>
>         <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me>>>> wrote:
>          > >
>          > > These kinds of projects also don't just get a jump start
>          > > then take off and keep going. Initial interest
>          > happens, all
>          > > the people who are just interested head out, then you are
>          > > left with a far smaller group of core contributors. Then
>          > > over time that core group even changes as life
>          > happens and
>          > > new shiny things come along. (Try to recall the often
>          > > provided bell-curve of tech adoption, then make the curve
>          > > narrower and far more dramatic. Then toss a few more
>          > curves
>          > > in over time.)
>          > >
>          > > Documentation projects in particular have one major flaw,
>          > > people don't feel it is worth their time to
>          > contribute. They
>          > > are paid to do write code that functions and move on
>          > to the
>          > > next thing. So taking time out to contribute to a
>          > document
>          > > is hardly on their mind. WPD is in a very slow-pace
>          > area and
>          > > we want contributors that really care about the
>          > quality of
>          > > their work. That quality comes at the cost of things
>          > moving
>          > > even slower.
>          > >
>          > > Things aren't dead, they are just stagnant. As WPD offers
>          > > wider community engagement then hopefully we can
>          > collect a
>          > > few more core contributors that will make things not
>          > seem so
>          > > slow. I'd much rather have a handful of core contributors
>          > > that do true quality work then an army of low-quality
>          > > contributions that makes things seem more active. The
>          > > content provided is far more useful in the end that way.
>          > >
>          > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Doug Schepers
>          > > <schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>
>         <mailto:schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>
>          > <mailto:schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>
>         <mailto:schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>>> wrote:
>          > >
>          > > Yes, Austin has been a really prolific contributor
>          > > (thanks!), and we also have Nishanth Babu adding
>          > > beginner DOM tutorials, among many other contributors
>          > > and content.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > We've actually concentrated quite a lot on
>          > > infrastructure over the last few months; Renoir
>          > has done
>          > > a great job.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > We're even adding over some new functionality, like
>          > > specs.webplatform.org <http://specs.webplatform.org>
>         <http://specs.webplatform.org>
>          > <http://specs.webplatform.org>
>          > > that hosts more experimental specifications, and
>          > adding
>          > > a technical discussion area where developers and
>          > > designers can ask questions about spec
>          > development. Our
>          > > emphasis is on closing the gap between standards
>          > > development and developers.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Regards–
>          > >
>          > > –Doug
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > On 4/10/15 6:31 PM, Austin William Wright wrote:
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Slow maybe, not dead. Over the last month I've
>          > > touched almost all the
>          > >
>          > > HTML element pages, merging duplicates, adding
>          > > examples, correcting
>          > >
>          > > normative references, and importing data.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > I also noticed a great TLS/HTTPS upgrade, and
>          > > MediaWiki upgrade, iirc.
>          > >
>          > > So even the server is getting love, it's not
>          > just me.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Austin Wright.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Ric Johnson
>          > > <ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>
>          > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>>
>         <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>
>          > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>>>
>          > >
>          > > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>
>          > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>>
>          > > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>
>          > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>>>>>
>         wrote:
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Is the WebPlatform project dead? I have not
>          > > seen any progress in
>          > >
>          > > quite a while.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > I thought this was an amazing chance to help
>          > > new developers learn
>          > >
>          > > web technologies, but it seems that we have
>          > > dropped the ball.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Is there anyone interested in kicking this
>          > > project back on gear?
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Ric Johnson
>          > >
>          > > OpenDomain
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >
>          >
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 17 April 2015 14:25:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 17 April 2015 14:25:27 UTC