- From: Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 13:19:28 +0200
- To: public-swicg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CANnQ-L4P=cs05z2bY63mbOTQ+sQOkq0sjT=qG7jtc32zXzeemA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi everyone, Over the past week or so, there's been some great discussion (both <a href=" https://www.w3.org/2023/09/12-social-minutes.html">at TPAC</a> and on the <a href="https://mastodon.social/@bengo/111070439501615412">fediverse</a>) about whether to work with W3C to charter a new Working Group (for example, for spec maintenance and errata purposes, although other scopes have been discussed as well). I'd like to assure some of the concerned community members that a Working Group is not an end in and of itself. It's just a tool (admittedly, a heavyweight and powerful one) to accomplish the goals of the community. And so, it makes sense to discuss and vote on specific scopes to a potential WG charter, and only kick off the process if there's agreement on those scopes. Here's my example scope proposal, to start the discussion: The SocialCG and the Fediverse community propose chartering a W3C Working Group for the purposes of specification maintenance of the ActivityPub and ActivityStreams 2 specifications. In scope: * Integrating the errata and fixes that have accumulated to the AP/AS2 specs. * Minor normative changes or clarifications to those specs that document extensive implementation experience, and have agreement from the community. Out of scope: * Authentication and identity * Portability profiles (profile import/export). Thanks!
Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2023 11:19:52 UTC