Re: SWICG Community Meeting on September 22nd

I’d like to point out that it’s not actually up to the CG to charter a WG.

We’re voting on a recommended scope to pass on to W3C staff. They’re going to include that scope in a draft charter, present it to W3C members, and members will decide whether or not to charter.

I realize that is some inside baseball, but there are some important parts there.

I don’t know what would happen, for example, if we didn’t provide a scope for a WG. It’s entirely possible that a WG charter would happen without our input, although I think that’s unlikely.

It’s also possible that the scope we provide will be edited, although again I think that’s unlikely.

And, of course, it’s possible that we recommend a scope, and the W3C members decide not to charter a WG.

Evan

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 6:01 AM, James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> wrote:
> 
> I am in full support of that!
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:58, Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com <mailto:On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:58, Dmitri Zagidulin <<a href=>> wrote:
>> Thanks James!
>> I'd like to propose a slight amendment to the agenda (I'll also post it to a separate mailing list & socialhub thread, so it doesn't get lost in this one).
>> Instead of voting to charter a new WG in general, I'd like to focus on only voting for a WG of a specific scope.
>> In other words - having a new WG is not a goal in and of itself. But accomplishing a specific task (for example, merging the errata, fixes and implementer best practices for the AP/AS2 specs), that'll be easier for the community to reason about (and of course, we'll provide plenty of time to hear from the larger community etc.)
>> 
>> Dmitri
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:13 PM James <jamesg@jamesg.blog> wrote:
>>> Hello everyone,
>>> 
>>> The Social Web Community Group met on September 12th in a hybrid W3C TPAC session, and in subsequent sessions on September 13th concerning ActivityPub test suite development and data portability.
>>> 
>>> We have scheduled a meeting for Friday, September 22nd to follow on from discussions during the meetings held at TPAC.
>>> 
>>> The meeting will be at 9am ET / 2pm UK / 6am PT.
>>> 
>>> 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).
>>> - Motion to recharter a W3C Social Web Working Group (WG).
>>> - If a WG is agreed to be rechartered, a discussion on the scope of said group.
>>> - Motion to start a data portability task force that would focus on social web data portability (particularly with regard to ActivityPub).
>>> - Discussion on scope of said task force.
>>> - Any other business.
>>> 
>>> All interested Community Group members are encouraged to attend the meeting, especially if you want to record your position on a WG and data portability task force. During the call, minutes will be taken by the appointed scribe and distributed after the meeting, as usual.
>>> 
>>> If you have any other business to propose, please contact the Chairs.
>>> 
>>> If you would like to review the meeting notes from TPAC, you can do so from the following links:
>>> 
>>> - SWICG group meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/09/12-social-minutes.html
>>> - Data portability meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/09/13-social-minutes.html
>>> - Test suite meeting: [Cannot locate minutes; will follow up]
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> The Chairs
> <publicKey - jamesg@jamesg.blog - 0xC06B40B5.asc>