W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2008

Re: We need to start building a community (Re: Primer updated with a Changes section)

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 12:16:38 -0400
Message-ID: <47D40D66.90304@digitalbazaar.com>
To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Ivan Herman wrote:
> I fully agree with the goals but, well... I am not sure why we
> should/would go out of W3C to achieve all this. We should explore the
> possibility to keep the community bound to W3C, too. We can look at the
> issue of
> - mailing lists (to set up extra mailings lists beyond what we have):
> this is trivially possible at W3C

Yes, agreed. Can we get a general community mailing list in the next week?:


Others that we should consider for the future:

public-rdfa-developers@w3.org (discuss implementation details)
public-rdf-vocabularies@w3.org (discuss RDF vocabulary best practices)

> - Wiki: W3C is moving to MediaWiki. The newer working groups (like OWL)
> use MediaWiki, some of the older wikis are transformed into media wiki,
> too. Ie, it should be possible to set up, if we want, a dedicated mediawiki

Good to know.

What is the license that people will be contributing under? I ask
because the Microformats community went through a great amount of
growing pains switching from a standard copyright based contribution
approach to a public domain based contribution approach.

Even to this day, it is hard to know whether some of the wiki pages are
public domain, standard copyright or under a Creative Commons
Attribution license.

I believe all contributions to the RDFa wiki should be placed into the
public domain. The wiki should be very clear that all contributions to
the wiki are under the public domain. It seems to be the best way to
create an even play ground for all community contributors and protect
the community from the threat of IP trolls.

> - rdfa.info already exists as a blogging platform. Although it could be
> possible to set up a blogging platform at W3C, too (eg, the Mobile Web
> community has that), we may want to stick with rdfa.info
> So why going 'away' from W3C?

>From a technology standpoint, we should be using a current,
well-supported blogging/wiki platform (such as Wordpress and MediaWiki).

The other important factor is having clean, easy to remember URLs.

Ideally, we would have something along these lines:

rdfa.w3.org/ (main website - simple - eye catching)
rdfa.w3.org/wiki (wiki root url)
rdfa.w3.org/discuss (mailing list root url)
rdfa.w3.org/blog (blog url)

or alternatively:


these URLs would be mirrored on rdfa.info:


Can we get those setup in the next week? I'd like us to not get caught
up in any W3C processes that would cause delays when attempting to
update the wiki.

There's nothing that would prevent us from starting to host this stuff
at Creative Commons to work out the kinks and then transfer to W3C when
we're certain about the layout and technology behind the site. This is
what we're doing for Crazy Ivan (RDFa Test Harness) - I assume that we
could do the same for this community site we're talking about?

I would prefer doing the latter as W3C folks seem to be under a heavy
workload as of late. If W3C admins can get all of this stuff setup in
1-2 weeks time, that would be ideal... if they can't, we can work with
Creative Commons to kick-start the site and transfer to W3C when the W3C
admins are ready.

Who's the point of contact at W3C to get the URLs and software config
that is needed? Ralph?

-- manu

Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: RDFa Basics in 8 minutes (video)
Received on Sunday, 9 March 2008 16:16:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:56 UTC