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

Re: Webplatform Facebook Group

From: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 02:41:06 +0000
Message-ID: <CADDMQ1_iHruopXzdktsAoFaqvyFfttjNeCCK9f9BjQbcRqphmw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, public-webplatform@w3.org
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, 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's site
when answering stackoverflow questions?


On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:13 PM Doug Schepers <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* 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>> 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>> 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>> 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>
> >                 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>>> 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 Monday, 20 April 2015 06:17:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 20 April 2015 06:17:33 UTC