Question: Human Centric Web stuff....

https://www.w3.org/2007/09/map/main.jpg spoke of webscience and
philosophical engineering.

what interest is there in creating a CG about 'philosophical
engineering'...?

it would require at least a few members, and indeed also; some text, about
the purpose of the group.

I was considering how i might write a query to W3C luminati; and thought,
perhaps, we need a new group.

part of the group purpose; imo, could/should be, engaging others who are
unhappy about #VaccinePassports and related #AI issues as does relate to
the scope of works,  involved by members of this group (and implicitly,
some of the underlying human values, that may not be well displayed
presently via consequence of said works).

Could this be an extension of RWW works?  perhaps.  Yet, I feel as though
the sentiments were not as expressly stated; as history now shows, could
have been required.

upside for W3C?

W3C has been a patent pool focused organisation, with little regard for the
individuals, on their own steam, figuring out how to 'make a better' (web)
'world', etc.  As such, resources are seemingly disproportionately provided
on a basis of ideologies (/income focused relations); than may otherwise be
considered appropriate from a STEM point of view.

worlds in a lot of pain atm...  I feel, the RWW community was an embodiment
of  people (despite some despicable behaviour at times, under duress
perhaps but nonetheless - how do we focus on progress); that sought to
ensure an outcome that was really about freedom of thought, and support for
various human rights considerations overall.

Certainly my wealthy family didn't teach me about employing the opportunity
furnished by them; as to enslave others.  I understand this is not
universally the case for others, but we need a way to form different groups
to focus on different ideas, as is the case otherwise with w3c cg's -
that's increasingly not about software patents, but moreover social
license.  imo.

so, if there's a steward for 'knowledge infrastructure engineering' who is
that party; what's the role of W3C?  perhaps its a little beyond the old
ideas that failed, via the former webizen approach, that wasn't really
about the full-ecosystem of 'digital twins' overall.

in anycase; just some ideas, but i thought maybe, providing license to help
people define, share and form a united (predicated) approach to what shared
values for cyber might look like via this group.

perhaps, that could be defined; as to better serve the lives of those
involved today, and how others get involved overtime - from various
disciplines, which seems like it'll involve lots of growing pains,

but at least we're growing.  subject, to opportunity, etc.

W3C has a mandate seemingly, about patent licensing collections; perhaps
that can be expanded...

Timothy Holborn.