Re: The Vocabulary, Schema.org governance, etc.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Basically, people in the WG that while of course everyone is welcome
as observers, some felt it would be unfair to give special treatment
to non-members, particularly as people in the WG pointed out they
could just join the WG and become members.

That being said, many people wanted a joint f2f between schema.org and
Social WG members, in particular given the proposed direction of AS
2.0 and Acdtions, so we're working with Ian and TPAC to find a
suitable time/place for a BOF over schema.org and Social WG.

Would Wednesday during the open-space session suit everyone?

Thursday has a number of conflicts for people in more than one WG
during TPAC.

On 09/24/2014 12:52 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> On 09/22/2014 06:03 PM, Guha wrote:
>> I would prefer to not get into the issue of Google join the
>> Social WG at this point.
>> 
>> Also, it doesn't make sense for me to come if I cannot
>> participate in the discussion.
>> 
>> If you think it would be useful, and if you think TPAC rules are 
>> flexible enough to allow it, I would be happy to come and answer
>> any questions the WG might have.
> Hi Guha and Schema.org crew!
> 
> First of all I would like to express my apologies for putting out
> this premature (informal) invitation! To my understanding group
> chairs have possibility to allow exceptions, still yesterday during
> our weekly teleconf many people objected it. You can find more
> details towards the end of these IMO quite chaotic (and not
> approved yet) minutes 
> http://www.w3.org/2014/09/23-social-minutes.html
> 
> Due to constraints of practiced nowadays political bureaucracy,
> myself I can't join TPAC in person, but I still will participate
> remotely and I believe that some Social WG members present have
> interest in coordinating our work with schema.org team. Right away
> I would like to support possibility of scheduling Web Schemas
> session during TPAC!
> 
> I will write in near future separate message with an overview of
> my evaluations of existing state of schema.org vocabulary in
> context of Social WG work. I just started yesterday a github
> repository to collect relevant examples and start gathering such
> feedback. Please feel free to gh:watch it already
> ("schema:FollowAction" almost would work here ;) ) 
> https://github.com/w3c-social/schema.org-examples/issues/1
> 
> I hope I didn't bring additional confusion to Schema.org <-> W3C
> Social WG relationship.
> 
> With friendly greetings, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=MKA2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 11:22:08 UTC