Re: Scope for a possible new SocialWeb (AP/AS2) W3C Working Group charter

út 19. 9. 2023 v 19:59 odesílatel Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name>
napsal:

> So, I think this comes down to what we mean by “breaking fixes”.
>
> One example is that currently the `altitude` property can apply to any
> `Object`, not just a `Place`. We could either clarify that an altitude is
> only meaningful for a Place, or we could leave it.
>
> That is theoretically a breaking change, but if there aren’t any
> implementations that use `altitude` for a `TentativeReply`, for example,
> then it is not practically breaking anything.
>
> Another example is that ActivityPub doesn’t explicitly say that the
> members of the `followers` collection (or a few other collections) are
> unique. Making that clear would probably be helpful. But it’s technically a
> breaking change, even if no implementation actually does it that way.
>
> Making this kind of tighter requirements that reflect actual usage may be
> helpful for implementers, even though they are technically normative
> changes.
>
> Making normative changes that do not reflect actual usage would not be
> helpful.
>
> I think we’d have to be careful with this whole area.
>

Gotcha.  These are all good items.  One I'd suggest would be a bigger
item.  And that would be to decide whether or not we want to make the OWL
Vocab normative.  This deserves a much longer discussion around the
trade-offs.  But in general whether to bump the version number will be a
question.


>
> Evan
>
> On Sep 19, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Bob Wyman <bob@wyman.us> wrote:
>
> Melvin wrote:
>
>> "But will there be breaking fixes, for hte major bugs?"
>
>
> Limiting the scope to addressing eratta would tend to reduce the risk of
> breaking fixes.
>
> bob wyman
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:29 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> út 19. 9. 2023 v 13:20 odesílatel Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com>
>> napsal:
>>
>>> 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 think it's important to get consensus as to whether working on a
>> charter is a work item for the group
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Scope is unlikely to be decided in an 1 hour meeting.  The SWXG was about
>> 3 years of work which was then a long period before the SWWG was chartered.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I guess the main discussion will be as to whether a new version of AP or
>> AS will be worked on, in the next few years.  Consensus so far seems to be
>> no breaking changes.  But will there be breaking fixes, for hte major
>> bugs?  Does this warrant a minor or major version number.
>>
>> I guess these things can be worked out in the coming months.  It will
>> also need wide review from the existing eco system.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Out of scope:
>>>
>>> * Authentication and identity
>>> * Portability profiles (profile import/export).
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>
>