Re: Position papers / workshop Re: FSW CG now has 100 members

On 07/03/2013 09:33 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> Harry Halpin:
>> Just to be clear, it's an official W3C workshop. Insofar as this CG is
>> part of the W3C, it's a workshop that part of the CG. The co-chair of
>> this CG is on the PC and attending. Whether or not the workshop is
>> representative of this group depends on if people submit position
>> papers and attend.
> I object. Please stop claiming that this workshop is aligned with the
> interests or priorities of the FSW CG.
>
> As I alread wrote the description of the workshop is aligned with the
> interests and priorities of the Social Business CG and not with those of
> the Federated Social Web CG. The same is true for the program committee.
> Position papers do not change that.
>
> I considered submitting a position paper, but I am reconsidering now. If
> the W3C considers creating a WG based on the results of the workshop
> please do so, but then do not claim that the WG represents the FSW CG.
>
> The W3C organised the workshop together with the Social Business CG
> while the FSW CG was not involved. It seems to be to late to change
> that. I would not even agree with the title "The Future of Business" for
> a common workshop.

Again, we are happy to accept more people on the PC. Again, we had a 
workshop for the Federated Social Web in 2011 and we lacked enough 
structure to go to a WG. Thus, when the Social Business CG said they'd 
like to try another workshop and showed that they had considerable 
backing from industry, we decided to try again. That in no way means FSW 
should be excluded. We tried to cast the net as wide as possible in 
terms of scope so FSW would fit in.

However, if folks from the Federated Social Web CG don't show up, 
there's little we can do. Note that Tantek from the IndieWeb is showing.
>
> That being said I look forward to the results of your workshop.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>

Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 00:26:21 UTC