W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > March 2013

Community Development Meeting 3/21

From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:53:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHZLcPoOU3K1hruQaVAsJe-hf2U4CH-yMxu5e0XGa6hdQ8+BRA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Doug May <intuedge@gmail.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Hi everyone,

This is in response to Doug May's reply to the "Web Platform Meeting Notes
3/15" message on 3/18.

First, THANKS Doug! I appreciate your enthusiasm and attention to this
project. You've got a lot of really good ideas, and I'd like to help you
execute them.

One thing that would help tremendously, maintain the subject of the thread
to which you are responding. If the subject of the thread is the meeting
notes, your response should be constrained by that subject. If you have new
subject matter, start a new thread. This is extremely important on a public
e-mail list, and one of the unwritten rules: Don't hijack the thread! :-)

I've moved your "agenda items" to the Community Task Force
The purpose of the task force page is to *outline* the broader project of
the task force. Could you follow through with your items on this page -
make them concise, focus on deliverables, and move them into the
appropriate structure? Also, please consider only those items within the
scope of Community Development, and remove those items that are beyond the

   - CSS Properties project - belongs in the CSS Properties project
   - Getting to steady state - belongs in the Beta
   - Site architecture - a separate project; create one under the
   - Dashboard - part of the
   - Press kit - use the public-webplatform@w3.org e-mail list for this;
   check with Doug Schepers.

With all of these, you should first raise your issues on the e-mail list
and get comments before editing the project pages.

Finally, I suggest that the items you cited as agenda are too many and too
broad to be covered in Thursday's meeting. We'll only have time to talk
about who is going to do what and when for the Doc Sprint. Since we are
very short of time (less than two weeks), we should plan for only what we
can reasonably handle. We will also take up the subject of establishing an
irregular meeting, and we can consider the broader agenda - and your items
- in determining the schedule for these meetings.

But, Doug, since you're not going to be there to defend yourself :-) ,
let's save the discussion on these other items for later meetings when you
can be there - okay? In the mean time, please hone your "agenda items" in
the Community Task Force
we can consider them.



On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Doug May <intuedge@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, Julee.
> tl/dr:  DougM is tied up Thurs and Friday so he did a brain dump on
> the community development task force meeting outline, to try to enable
> and inspire some of the work that needs to be done next (imho).
> I'm currently booked at O'Reilly this Thursday and Friday (all day) to
> be a student in their live trainings on closures and Clojure (two
> topics on two days), so I am likely to miss both the Community
> Development task force meeting as well as the regular Friday content
> meeting.  At the risk of injecting some stumbling blocks for others, I
> fleshed out some detail for the community development conversation,
> hopefully consolidating, clarifying, and simplifying what I tried to
> say in earlier and longer rambles on key topics.
> I assume rollback is only a few clicks away.
> I still feel very strongly that the upcoming doc sprint is a key
> opportunity to expand our visibility and transparency by fleshing out
> both our prep plans, and execution plans, for the sprint, as an
> exercise in using the new project tools that Garbee has delivered for
> us.  It is also my assessment that there's lots of work to map the
> generic capabilities of TBG onto whatever turns out to be best
> practices for our work here, and that we will do best by rapidly
> iterating on small subsets of the larger problem (i.e., plan the
> sprint and one other area well, and use the lessons learned to go more
> directly to what's needed on the next topic).
> Somehow the notes on making relative status and progress more visible
> on the main pages (as well as individual topics) hasn't yet made it
> onto the agenda, but I mention it here as a great first foray for a
> small design team at the next event.  The current layout is entirely
> flat -- every topic appears to have the same status, priority,
> relevance, and focus, and we want to shift that so that the page is
> way more dynamic and engaging and reflective of our progress on our
> game-changing mission(s).
> Maybe somewhat hidden between the lines is the non-trivial challenge
> of getting large-scale technical volunteer participation, at the
> levels needed to establish a de-facto standard reference.  I have
> tried to drop some hints and best practices from experience alongside
> the brainstorming and other suggestions, with no attachment to any
> individual idea's adoption.  I have left all of this under the
> community development conversation, because it seems to me that that
> is where we have to confront the gap from our currently unrealized
> potential to our dazzlingly game-changing possibilities.  It is in no
> way intended to burden, distract, or delay the work of that task
> force, and I will gladly redirect all commentary, given a more
> appropriate direction to aim at.
> Submitted in solidarity and partnership,
> DougM
Received on Tuesday, 19 March 2013 20:53:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:42 UTC