W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vision-core@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Doing HTML the right way at W3C

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:02:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4C4879B4.8090701@intertwingly.net>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
CC: public-vision-core@w3.org
On 07/22/2010 12:01 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 10:52 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> People are building on W3C work today.  Celebrate it.  Link to it.
>> Reward it with attention.
>>
>> Do that, and they will do more.
>
> How do you propose we do that?
>
> At the moment, Working Group homepage are maintained by team contacts
> and sometimes chairs as well. For HTML, we have two pages, both focusing
> internally as you said:
>   http://www.w3.org/html/
>   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/
>
> We could keep really on those two sets of individuals, or try to open
> this even further, possibly even asking for volunteers in the group to
> make those pages more useful to the community.

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ should remain inward focused.

http://www.w3.org/html/ could very well evolve into what I am 
suggesting.  Let's look at your list:

- Technical writ[ing]
- Education
  * Online training
  * Course materials
- Testing
- Validators
- PR materials
- Certification

Those are the types of things I would expect to find using this page as 
a staring point.  With that expectation in mind, this page fails to deliver.

How should we populate such lists?  Here's a few places to start:

http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?q=html5
http://twitter.com/#search?q=html5
http://www.w3.org/html/planet/
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?keywords=html5&index=books

In fact, ask people to suggest links by specifying @w3c in twitter.

I would further echo Dave Ragget's comment that HTML either subsumes or 
closely relates to things like scripts, styling etc and those things 
should either be directly included or linked to.  Modernizr and 
FaceBook's open graph protocol are very much a part of the HTML5 ecosystem.

Again, the links should be engaging verbs.  We also need to limit 
ourselves to 5+/-2 major choices (we can have as many supplementary 
choices as we want).  Ruby on Rails' page excels at this with 4.

We can also be curators with an agenda.  Accessibility is important to 
the W3C, so we should highlight that.  In fact, tell people in advance 
what we are going to highlight next, and solicit links.  At first there 
will be embarrassing silences and the quality will be uneven.  Keep at 
it it though, and it will improve.

Oh, and take advantage of OpenGraph.  Facebook can drive traffic.

> Philippe

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2010 17:03:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:47:24 UTC