Re: Will your Community Group meet during TPAC 2016?

Hi all,

On 30/03/2016 09:23 , Dan Brickley wrote:
> From a broader W3C perspective, having Community Groups involved at
> TPAC is a very positive thing. At the Chairs Breakfast meeting during
> last year's TPAC I argued for greater inclusion of Community Group
> chairs and participants within W3C activities. There are now a large
> number of CGs across many topics, and everything we can do to
> encourage grassroots coordination and communication amongst these
> groups, and between these groups and the more heavyweight full Working
> Groups is super valuable.

While I very well understand the hesitations of those who already have
their TPAC week well booked, as well as the issues inherent in not
having everyone in the room, I think there would be great value in
meeting for TPAC.

Discussing things in the meeting does not preclude discussion in the GH
tracker; it just means that whatever comes out of the discussion we need
to make sure is properly summarised in the relevant issues. Being able
to work things out face to face can be very helpful.

This can also be a great opportunity to reach out to other groups and
people on a variety of topics where we connect. I don't think that a
RDFa-versus-Microdata-versus-Microformats discussion is of any use to
this group, but a few of us could chat to the HTML people about it. The
bib people could talk to DPUB, etc. TPAC is as much about meeting in the
group as it is about meeting outside the group.

>  * I'd suggest (without having yet consulted the other CG chairs) that
> a single TPAC CG meeting around would be preferable to
> having 10+ different meetings for the various CGs
> listed above
>  * That the spirit of the event is "for those who are attending TPAC
> anyway, or quite likely to for other reasons", rather than "A
> must-attend meeting for anyone involved at"
> * It looks like the offer to CGs is that we can have (several?) 2h
> meeting slots. I'd suggest we do something like a couple of mornings
> (2x 2 slots) if available, one focussed on specific schema topics, the
> other on broader issues that take advantage of likely attendees e.g.
> publisher/webmaster experience with these technologies, or the
> relationship between microdata/rdfa/json-ld with Web Components.

Agreed on all of the above.

• Robin Berjon - - @robinberjon
• — intelligent science publishing

Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 13:55:12 UTC