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

Re: Webplatform Facebook Group

From: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:28:38 +0300
Message-ID: <CABc02_JgF0_=Ay6Sk0919gPR1aY-_iLXBC8S3qgkgb3qOXj1rw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>
Cc: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
There is this thing-
https://developers.google.com/+/api/pages-signup

But someone has to sign up on behalf of WebPlatform.org and the actual API
reference is missing.


☆*PhistucK*

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com> wrote:

> G+ has no api last I've heard. I completely agree that facebook will get
> more exposure, but I completely disagree that g+ is dead. We should do
> both.. And I would love to help with marketing and publicity but would not
> be best for the captain of those efforts in the long term.
>
> I think Abhimanyu has already kind of taken off with the facebook lead and
> we have quite a few interested parties already.. My recommendation would be
> to keep it open, but active. Maybe myself and Abhimanyu can simply motivate
> people to share more?
>
> Btw, This is the most active I've ever seen the mailing list.
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 9:39 AM PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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).
>>>>          > >
>>>>          > > ---
>>>>          > > &#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 16:29:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 17 April 2015 16:29:56 UTC