Re: October 6th Meeting and Calls for WG Scope Contributions [via Social Web Incubator Community Group]

so 7. 10. 2023 v 16:02 odesílatel James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> napsal:

> As part of our role in facilitating consensus, it is important that we are
> moving discussions forward productively. Significant discussion has gone on
> with regard to a prospective WG charter in the mailing list and in meetings
> but we were lacking a single place where specific points people wanted to
> action on were aggregated. Many members' support of a WG has been
> contingent upon conditions being met, a one being a clear, defined scope.
>
> The end goal of the CG in advising on any prospective WG charter is a
> scope that codified the views of the community and that has received
> consensus. A wiki helps us get closer -- having one collaborative document
> everyone can refine -- while ensuring participation is open to all members.
> I provided guidance on how to access the wiki in the initial email
> announcing the page, although should that not be sufficient I am happy to
> prepare a primer.
>
> If there are objections from the community, we can move to another
> platform. Working practices can and should change should a mode of
> documentation hinder the majority of the group's ability to do productive
> work.
>

Thanks James.  A bit of transparency regarding decisions would be helpful.
You said "The idea was privately raised by a CG member", but you didnt say
which member.  Shouldnt we be doing this out in the open?

Regarding the wiki, there seems to be quite a few indieweb specs in there.
I was wondering if you could give a quick update on the current state of
indieweb, in particularly 2 questions I have:

- What is the approximate DAU of the indieweb itself
- Roughly how many devs are active

I appreciate that there is a range of specs that go over and beyond
indieweb, but it would be good to get a rough ball park of where the
movement is compared with 6 years ago (by the way I'm a member, and run
code on my own homepage too :))


>
> James
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Saturday, October 7th, 2023 at 11:50, Melvin Carvalho <
> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> so 7. 10. 2023 v 11:29 odesílatel James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> napsal:
>
>> Thank you for your question!
>>
>> "The Chairs" represents all Chairs. This distinction is important because
>> it clearly represents the differentiation between Chairs' personal
>> perspectives and a notice intended for the group that represents the result
>> of discussion among Chairs.
>>
>> The idea was privately raised by a CG member and, as a result, was given
>> due consideration. We -- Dmitri, Nightpool, and I -- decided to use the
>> wiki as a forum for all CG members to share their thoughts on scope.
>> Agreeing on specific language is easier in a document where everyone can
>> contribute and collaborate versus a mailing list where it can be easy to
>> miss points. Our primary concern is ensuring that thoughts on a new Charter
>> are easy for everyone to navigate.
>>
> Thank you for sharing the process and intentions behind the recent
> actions. A few points could use a bit more clarification for the broader
> understanding of the group:
>
>    1.
>
>    *Identification*: Can you share which CG member initiated the idea in
>    the private discussion?
>    2.
>
>    *Decision-Making Process*: The phrase "We decided" raises some
>    concerns as the role of the chairs is traditionally to facilitate group
>    consensus, not to make autonomous decisions. Can you shed some light on how
>    this decision was reached among the Chairs without group consensus?
>    3.
>
>    *Platform Choice*: The choice of the wiki for drafting the WG, while
>    collaborative, seems a bit outside of our usual workflow. Could you share
>    the reasoning behind this choice of platform?
>
> Thank you for addressing these points.
>
>>
>> The wiki has been used across the W3C, including by the former Working
>> Group. The Chairs contacted the W3C team to allow wiki access to all CG
>> members to contribute. Invitations to contribute to the wiki page were
>> noted in an email to the mailing list (the one to which you are responding)
>> and in last week's meeting.
>>
>> Let me know if you have any other questions!
>>
>> James
>>
>> ------- Original Message -------
>> On Saturday, October 7th, 2023 at 03:13, Melvin Carvalho <
>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> pá 29. 9. 2023 v 20:36 odesílatel W3C Community Development Team <
>> team-community-process@w3.org> napsal:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you to everyone who participated in the discussions pertaining to
>>> a prospective Working Group (WG). We have two announcements:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our next community meeting, and;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> An invitation to collaborate on scope for a prospective WG on the W3C
>>> wiki.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> October 6th Meeting
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We are scheduling a Community Group meeting for Friday, October 6th.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The meeting will be at 11am ET / 4pm UK / 8am PT, and hosted at
>>> https://meet.jit.si/social-web-cg.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The rough agenda for the meeting is as follows:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Introductions (optional) and community announcements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP Protection Note Reminder: (a) Anyone can participate in these calls.
>>> However, all substantive contributors to any CG Work Items must be members
>>> of the CG with full IPR agreements signed, and (b); To contribute to Work
>>> Items: ensure you have a W3 account, and sign the W3C Community Contributor
>>> License Agreement (CLA).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A discussion on scope for a prospective WG, following on from our
>>> previous CG meeting, discussions on the mailing list, and contributions to
>>> the wiki (see below for more information).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Discussion to start a data portability task force that would focus on
>>> social web data portability (particularly with regard to ActivityPub), and
>>> the scope thereof.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Discussion on a formal decision making process for the group, following
>>> on from community discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any other business.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Call to Contribute to Prospective WG Scope
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Chairs have created a new page on the W3C wiki to discuss the scope
>>> of a prospective WG:
>>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/WG_Charter_Discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> "The chairs have ... "
>>
>> Which chairs? Where was the meeting? Who proposed it? Why was this path
>> taken when the wiki is not a tool in use for most of the group?
>>
>> Where is the transparency here?
>>
>>>
>>> The wiki page is open to all CG members. You can log in with the same
>>> username and password you use for your W3C account. Please let the Chairs
>>> know via a private email if login doesn't work so we can assist you
>>> directly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> WGs have the ability to create technical documents for consideration on
>>> the W3C Standards Track and to amend existing W3C Recommendations. The
>>> Chairs have created a "Deliverables" section in which we invite you to list
>>> any deliverables that you think are appropriate to include in a WG.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you have further notes or comments about the WG Charter discussion,
>>> please leave them on the page so that we can aggregate as much information
>>> as possible in one place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Chairs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------
>>>
>>> This post sent on Social Web Incubator Community Group
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 'October 6th Meeting and Calls for WG Scope Contributions'
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/community/socialcg/2023/09/29/october-6th-meeting-and-calls-for-wg-scope-contributions/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Learn more about the Social Web Incubator Community Group:
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/community/socialcg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>