- From: Michiel B. de Jong <anything@michielbdejong.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 12:04:41 +0200
- To: <public-fedsocweb@w3.org>
On 2013-05-08 14:56, Andreas Kuckartz wrote: > 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 ;-) wait, i don't understand your reply. i meant that this document should be a subset of the content of the wiki. so then: 1) the current wiki content is a good starting point for this document 2) we can use the wiki instance as our document versioning system, by simply making every section we write into a wiki page (instead of emailing it around etc.) 3) as we write the new best practice document, we are updating the wiki, because the best practice document is a subset of the wiki so then "best practice document volunteers" === "wiki volunteers". and yes, i totally agree this initiative is very welcome! it is easy to sometimes forget how incredibly important this tiny discussion group is for the future of the world's (social) infrastructure as a whole. > 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. ok, fair enough! > 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. sounds like a plan. > 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. great! let's do it. but as i said, let's use the existing wiki as our content management system for this. My 2ct, Michiel de Jong.
Received on Friday, 10 May 2013 10:05:06 UTC