Re: SWICG Community Meeting on September 22nd

út 19. 9. 2023 v 17:06 odesílatel Evan Prodromou <>

> 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.

Thanks Evan

Fixes to specs that are already published by the W3C should be reasonable
to be in scope.

So that means fediverse stuff, and indieweb stuff, with possible updates,
that they've done in the last X years.

Charters can take months or years to get right and approved for a working
group.  The less things that are in there, the higher the chance of
success, and faster the deliverables.

I'd suggest avoiding adding too many new items (though of course there will
be lobbying) and avoid controversial items.

A simple yes/no as to whether to work on a charter seems a logical step.
Then there is a long process as to what goes in there, review, and so on.

Just my 2 cents, staff contact will know alot more on this topic.

> Evan
> On Sep 19, 2023, at 6:01 AM, James <> wrote:
> I am in full support of that!
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:58, Dmitri Zagidulin <
> <On+Tue,+Sep+19,+2023+at+10:58,+Dmitri+Zagidulin+%3C%3Ca+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 <> 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:
>> - Data portability meeting:
>> - Test suite meeting: [Cannot locate minutes; will follow up]
>> Thank you,
>> The Chairs
> <publicKey - - 0xC06B40B5.asc>

Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2023 17:10:02 UTC