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 22:46:42 -0400
Message-ID: <5531C592.8040301@w3.org>
To: abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>
CC: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>, public-webplatform@w3.org
Thanks, Abhimanyu. I've added you as an admin.

On 4/17/15 9:35 PM, abhimanyu0003 wrote:
> I am willing to contribute in the publication of the group. I also
> support having an additional community on Google+.
>
> Btw, I've sent a request to join the WebPlatform.org group -- please
> accept the request and make me an admin too so that I can kickstart
> creating docs in the group.
>
> (I'll soon delete the group I made. I've told the members to migrate.
> There are 12 people in that group in total)
>
> ---
> </Abhimanyu>
>
>
> ---- On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 01:43:02 +0530 *Doug Schepers
> <schepers@w3.org>* wrote ----
>
>     Hi, Abhimanyu–
>
>     Thanks for taking the initiative to create that Facebook group.
>
>     Actually, we already created a Facebook group as an experiment, back
>     when you first suggested it. We'd prefer to use that site; we've taken
>     the liberty of adding you as an admin.
>
>     https://www.facebook.com/groups/WebPlatform.org/
>
>     Let's continue this discussion about how to best use this resource, and
>     other social media resources.
>
>     Regards–
>     –Doug
>
>
>     On 4/16/15 11:56 PM, abhimanyu0003 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>, 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>'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>>> 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>>> 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>>> 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>
>      > > > 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>>>> 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 Saturday, 18 April 2015 02:47:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 18 April 2015 02:47:00 UTC