- From: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
- Date: 8 May 2013 14:56:49 +0200
- To: "Michiel B. de Jong" <anything@michielbdejong.com>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
Michiel B. de Jong: > i think instead of creating a best practice document, we can just make > sure the wiki is complete and up-to-date: > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/federatedsocialweb/wiki/Main_Page Yes, updating the Wiki is necessary. Volunteers are welcome ;-) > we can try to give the reader a sense of > > - how many developer are currently working on/with a certain protocol? > - how many software projects/independent code bases "speak" the protocol? > - does it pass SWAT0? > - how many servers / active user accounts support it? Yes, the protocols need to be evaluated objectively and these are potentially relevant criteria. (Numbers of servers/active users etc. need to be verified.) > i would say let's just keep giving all protocols and projects in the > ecosystem a fair chance to present themselves here, and exchange > experiences. maybe a winner will emerge, maybe not. but choosing one > through a mailinglist-vote sounds like a bad idea. I did not propose any procedures on how to make potentially controversial decisions. But it is possible that votes are also relevant information for readers of the document. And sometimes it can help to promote interoperability by explicitly recommending one of two or more alternatives. But we do not need to discuss that now. We can do that when such a concrete controversy arises. In general the document can and should concentrate on those aspects where there is rather broad consensus. I am confident and hopeful that the document will not be empty when this is a guideline. Cheers, Andreas
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2013 02:23:21 UTC