Re: domain WebPlatform.com

Doug,

I have some fantastic news!
Google has finally given attribution to OpenDomain for Schema.Org
http://schema.org/docs/faq.html#17

This has restored my faith in open source - if you want to open up
discussion of the use of the WebPlatform.com, please let me know.

Our goal is for the domain to actually be used - we may consider a donation
of the domain, but do not want a simple redirect or copy.  If you are no
longer interested, we will put up a site ourselves but will not harm the
community.

Ric Johnson

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi, Ric–
>
> On 7/19/14 2:13 AM, Ric Johnson wrote:
>
>> Doug,
>>
>> I seem to have taken great offense to your remarks.  I am writing this
>> email in a very heated mood, and I probably should edit it, but I think
>> the topics I raise should be discussed, so I will keep the majority of
>> it.  I do hope to be able to work together, but you have questioned my
>> integrity several times, so I feel I must respond.
>>
>
> I was trying to be careful to state that I wasn't questioning your
> integrity or intentions; I apologize if it came off the wrong way.
>
>
> I never received any response to my request.  I checked all my emails
>> and can not find any previous discussion even on the email list
>> archives.  Please forward it to me if I am mistaken.
>>
>
> I sent the response offlist. I don't seem to have a copy of it, but it
> explained what I've already told you, that I've had bad experience with
> "borrowed" domains in the past with svg.org, and no longer wish to rely
> on domains that we don't control. This is nothing against you or your
> service; it's simply not a situation we want to get into.
>
> In addition, from what I've read on the Web about OpenDomain.org, you
> require a link back to your site on every page; we cannot offer this,
> because it's too similar to advertising; even our stewards do not have
> direct links back to their sites from our page footers.
>
>
> I am sorry to hear what happened with SVG.org, but please do not put
>> OpenDomain in the same category.  Early on in the project, we were
>> offered millions of dollars for one domain, but we gave it away for
>> Free, only to be later sued by that person.  That almost killed the
>> project, but I fought to keep it going for years. More recently, we were
>> contacted by a broker who offered $20k for another domain, but we told
>> her that we do not sell domains, they should be used to support Open
>> Source.  We were ecstatic to learn that that she was working in behalf
>> of one of the top promoters of open source: Google wanted to participate
>> in OpenDomain!  So we gave the domain Schema.org to them for Free - all
>> we asked was to to be mentioned in the press release and a link.
>>   Unfortunately, they still have yet to fulfill their promises. Sorry to
>> go off on a rant, but I have personally spent hundreds of thousands of
>> dollars to acquire domains from squatters and gave them all away for
>> Free to support open source and non-profits and it riles me for someone
>> to question my "good intentions".
>>
>
> I'm sorry that you had that experience with Schema.org, but we're not
> affiliated with that project. We can only speak for WebPlatform.org, and we
> are not interested in using other domain names that we don't control. Thank
> you for the offer, however.
>
>
> (Just a side note... WebPlatform.org isn't about open source, though we do
> use open source software; it's about open standards, which I personally
> think is just as important as open source, because it allows
> interoperability between software regardless of whether it's open source or
> proprietary; for example, HTML and CSS work the same way in Firefox and
> Internet Explorer, in Brackets and DreamWeaver. I think this is what makes
> open standards, and the Web, so powerful, and why I believe so passionately
> in this project that is meant to empower everyone to use open standards...
> and that's why our site is free, and is under a CC-BY license. Sorry for
> the digression, when I see people conflate open source and open standards,
> I feel the need to draw the distinction.)
>
>
> I am also not sure what your intention for the paragraph "If your
>> project is about open domains.." is intended to convey. OpenDomain is
>> about "open source for domains". WebPlatform.com should be about
>> commercial application of the Web Platform.  I do no see any conflict
>> that I support multiple projects - I also founded CharityCoin.Org . We
>> mint celebrity coins to support charities - check it out and let me know
>> what you think!
>>
>> Also, we do not see if someone offers a service on .COM that is not
>> available on the .ORG  that is can be considered competing. We do not
>> want redirects for our domains - we ask that the domains be used with
>> content that benefits the web.
>>
>
> Perhaps "compete" is the wrong word; let me try to be more clear. If you
> were to use a variation on our logo, and were to offer similar services
> (teaching people about the Web Platform), that would confuse users as to
> which site was which. They might hear about WebPlatform Docs, but
> accidentally go to WebPlatform.com, thinking it was the same site. Surely
> you see how that harms our project? If you truly want to help this project,
> there are many other ways you can do so without risking this harm, and I'm
> happy to work with you to find some safe, productive ways to help.
>
>
> Several years ago, I gave OpenAjax.org in care of the W3 to help
>> standardize Ajax.
>>
>
> The OpenAjax Alliance was not affiliated with W3C, though we did have some
> overlap in membership, so I can see why you might have had the wrong
> impression:
>
>   http://www.openajax.org/members.php
>
>
> The problem is that developers did not know what
>> "OpenAjax" was.  To this day, I think only Dojo ever implemented it for
>> a short time.  I see this same problem again with WebPlatform - I have
>> gone to dozens of web developer meetups and only one person even heard
>> of the Web Platform project.  I think that everyone has done some great
>> work contributing content, but the marketing needs much more exposure.
>>
>
> Yes, we do need more exposure, and we will shift to that mode when we feel
> our content is ready. Hopefully that will be soon!
>
> But as far as the Web Platform itself (HTML, CSS, SVG, MathML, JavaScript,
> DOM), there has never been a more successful, more widely used, more
> broadly understood language or platform. It's wildly popular, and just
> getting more popular and more powerful. As this project, WebPlatform.org,
> matures, we feel it will be an essential part of the developer experience.
> Rome wasn't built in a day!
>
>
> Ok - again I am sorry for my tone of this email - I will try to be more
>> constructive:
>> That is our hope for WebPlatform.com - to help gain exposure for the Web
>> Platform. We would like it to be used to as a separate site that has
>> COMmercial value. That does not mean that I would profit - I just
>> believe that would encourage more participation or at least help with
>> some costs.
>>
>
> I don't see how creating another site that might confuse developers would
> encourage more participation in our project. I think it would have just the
> opposite effect.
>
>
> We would be happy to contribute the domain - to the Web Platform as a
>> separate organization.  Has there been any discussion of a foundation?
>>
>
> There was some discussion early on about forming a foundation, but we
> didn't feel it was necessary, because W3C is a responsible organization
> that manages the site. If you wish to contribute the domain, W3C is the
> organization to which you can assign the registration. We would be grateful
> for your donation.
>
> If by "contribute" you mean to redirect the domain while retaining the
> registration, then we'll have to politely decline, and thank you again for
> the offer.
>
> Regards-
> -Doug
>