Re: AS2/AP tasks for a chartered social web working group

On 20/09/2023 09:55, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> Whether the WG wants to look at bridges, is up to the WG.

Well, the WG can *look at* whatever it wants, but it can only issue 
normative guidance about what's in its charter, which is why I bring it 
up now, in the context of a charter that won't trigger debate elsewhere 
in the W3C.  I can't imagine a way of bringing bridges into scope 
without triggering valid W3C concerns and lots of political calculus, 
and without overriding the original spec's deliberate decision to keep 
authentication out of scope.

This is why I already suggested that interop profiles, authentication 
profiles, and bridges (which rely on the former two) stay in the CG, as 
they are in Dmitri's proposed charter.  I don't think we are stable 
enough or aligned or consensual enough on the meaning of the current 
version to bring major-version questions (or major breakage) into scope; 
the more we leave in the CG, the sooner (and safer) we can parallelize 
work on a minor version without disrupting incubation and extension.

Thanks,
__juan

Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2023 09:42:24 UTC