Re: Getting the group back on track

Please count Known in as an implementer. Happy to move forward quickly.

Ben

On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:

> +1 to this email.
>
> On 10/06/2015 07:06 PM, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > So I initially wrote a different version of this email, but I thought
> > today's call was lively enough that it deserved a rewrite.  So here
> > goes!
> >
> > I'm glad to hear that there's a general concern in the group that we
> > really need to get moving for real on the client to server / server to
> > server APIs.  I was also happy to hear that in general people seem eager
> > to get ActivityStreams to move forward.  Great news!  Now, can we do it?
> > Can we fulfill the missions of this group?
> >
> > I think we can.  ActivityStreams 2.0 is already looking quite polished.
> > Today we got some good clarity on what an ActivityStreams test suite
> > would look like, and I can help on this.  But the deliverables of social
> > api and federation api seem stuck in a rut.  At minimum, we need to
> > agree on a format and move forward with it.
>
> Right now, off top of my head implementers would be:
>
> 1) IBM Connections
> 2) Pump.io
> 3) MediaGoblin
> 4) Objective8 (Thoughtworks)
>
> Anyone else?
>
> Compared to many other W3C specs, if we can get them all *actually*
> implemented and tested that would be great - and would be fine for CR.
> While I admit AS2 implementer momentum is not as much as we want, it
> does exist.
> >
> > Since it's already a deliverable, the mandatory format might as well be
> > ActivityStreams + JSON.  It's okay to say in the specification that
> > other formats are optional, and here's how to handle them, but
> > ActivityStreams should be mandatory.  As Evan said on the call today, it
> > would "look strange" to not have that be part of the official APIs the
> > group puts forward.  But appearing non-strange is just one reason: the
> > goal of this group should be putting forward a standard that the real
> > world will probably use.  The real world is currently setting up
> > endpoints that shoot JSON back and forth at each other.  Well, we've got
> a
> > basis, and start defining how to shoot that across some endpoints.
>
> S/JSON/JSON-LD but yes, most people will use it as JSON.
>
> >
> > By the way, it's my observation (and actually not at all just my
> > observation, several people external to the group have raised this to
> > me, even while I was traveling to FSF 30th just this last weekend) that
> > one of the main causes of this group getting so "stuck in a rut" is that
> > this group is caught in the crossfire that has been going on for 15
> > years: Microformats vs Linked Data.  I have massive respect for people
> > on both sides, and I'd love to see this group serve some purpose of
> > seeing these sides come together, but more than anything I believe the
> > opposite has happened: again and again we get caught into age-old
> > arguments between these camps.
> >
> > The Microformats vs Linked Data war has been going on for 15 years.  If
> > it hasn't been solved outside of this group in all this time, there's no
> > way it can be reconciled inside this group.  Take it outside!
>
> I would suggest the Social IG. I would actually put the Activity
> Vocabulary and all vocabulary issues in the Social IG, as specified in
> the original charter.
>
> Some people seemed to dislike my noting what was on and out of scope of
> charter, but I might add we seem to have gone down a few ratholes and
> not made as much progress as we wanted. Let's reverse that trend by
> staying in charter and in scope!
>
> >
> > I have more to say on all the above subjects, but in the interest of
> > keeping this email short, here's a summary: we already have a nice and
> > dandy serialization format that fits the toolchains of most of the web
> > frameworks out there.  We've spent a lot of time getting it to a state
> > that the group seems reasonably happy with.  We should take advantage of
> > that and move forward on recommending APIs that people can use.
>
> +1. I hope we can get a LDP/micropub - and let's not forget ActivityPump
> convergence. Microformats can convert to JSON, and so can RDF. Thus, I
> don't see a huge problem with going forward with AS2.
>
> >
> > So, how about it?
> >  - Chris
> >
>
>
>
>

-- 
*Ben Werdmuller*
CEO & co-founder, Known
withknown.com | werd.io
<http://goog_1933028737>
+1 (312) 488-9373

Known, Inc | 421 Bryant St | San Francisco, CA 94107