- From: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:39:11 +0300
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABc02_Lz4uxhp=ChyqgY5vz=UmNy_tbqhLNAZO23HHFpjtAz2g@mail.gmail.com>
I am not familiar with their APIs, sorry (and I do not volunteer to implement such a bot, either). I imagine so, though. If we end up implementing this kind of bot, then I guess any objection is moot because everyone can just keep posting to the venue most comfortable for them without losing any information. ☆*PhistucK* On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: > 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). >> > > >> > > --- >> > > </Abhimanyu> >> > > >> > > >> > > ---- 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 14:40:21 UTC