- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:24:05 -0400
- To: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, public-webplatform@w3.org
Hi, Russell– I tend agree with you that G+ might be a better place to get high-quality contributions, but I'm open to anything that helps build an maintain the contributor community. I like what you're saying about marketing and publicity. Are you interested in helping brainstorm and drive that? Regards– –Doug On 4/16/15 10:41 PM, Russell wrote: > Hi All, > > I've been eavesdropping for a while and finally thought I would throw in > my two cents on this. Probably more like two hundred cents.. > > I think the group needs a lot more exposure, but I am worried that a > Facebook group could bring in a lot of bad submissions. Is there an easy > way to manage non-serious submissions? I have seen much more of a > programmer / IT community on G+, so I would throw in my vote for that > before Facebook, but we still have the potential for the same problem. > Twitter could be even better, but there is already a web platform > account, it just doesn't seem to be doing much evangelism. > > Either way, we definitely need a core group of individuals dedicated to > marketing and publicity if this project is going to take off like it > needs to. I remember hearing about the webplatform when it first started > up and remember the excitement within myself and my fellow developers, > but I don't think anyone really remembers anything about it until they > randomly stumble upon it again. All the devs I know use MDN, Dash, > devdocs.io <http://devdocs.io>, or whatwg. I find myself using those > more often too, as webplatform doesn't seem to have the "umph" needed to > take over. > > Part of this is because webplatform rarely shows on Google results. > Webplatform.org does not rank anywhere close to MDN and we are not > showing for the most common of css/html/javascript searches. We need to > hit Google's front-page, and thinking about it more now, I think that is > most important. Let's make all the groups. > > Have we worked on SEO at all? Is anyone pointing to webplatform.org > <http://webplatform.org>'s site when answering stackoverflow questions? > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:13 PM Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org > <mailto:schepers@w3.org>> wrote: > > Hi, Abhimanyu– > > Okay, let's explore this idea again. I admit to being skeptical, but if > you think it will help get more contributors, and to keep contributors > active, then I'm open to at least testing it. > > What do you suggest for next steps? > > Regards– > –Doug > > On 4/12/15 3:26 AM, abhimanyu0003 wrote: > > I recommended months ago of having a solid third-party, somewhat > > clutter-ish and compromised portal: an open Facebook group. > > > > I love the WPD and it'll one of the best technical projects in the > > future, but my other priorities are so easy to get my hands into, > while > > contributing and discussing WPD work is non-modern. > > > > An open Facebook group will mean our attention being diverted to WPD > > more frequently and have much more members (an open group is seen by > > friends ofall members, thus increasing our visibility and getting > more > > enthusiastic contributors). > > > > --- > > </Abhimanyu> > > > > > > ---- On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 04:19:12 +0530 *aaa@bzfx.net > <mailto:aaa@bzfx.net>* wrote ---- > > > > Have we reached out to see how we can be more accommodating?i > > > > I'd much prefer not using a vendor-specific, or even > > vendor-controlled, source. > > > > Austin. > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:46 AM, PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com > <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com> > > <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > While it is not dead, some vendors (or a single vendor?) are > > instructing their members to prefer > > > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/RNk93vpOaV8/2_hw97dJ0NQJ> > > other > > > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/RNk93vpOaV8/fhNVU0s8DCQJ> > > documentation venues. > > To me, this is really sad. > > > > Perhaps you can do something about it? > > > > > > ☆*PhistucK* > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Jonathan Garbee > > <jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me> > <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me <mailto:jonathan@garbee.me>>> wrote: > > > > These kinds of projects also don't just get a jump start > > then take off and keep going. Initial interest > happens, all > > the people who are just interested head out, then you are > > left with a far smaller group of core contributors. Then > > over time that core group even changes as life > happens and > > new shiny things come along. (Try to recall the often > > provided bell-curve of tech adoption, then make the curve > > narrower and far more dramatic. Then toss a few more > curves > > in over time.) > > > > Documentation projects in particular have one major flaw, > > people don't feel it is worth their time to > contribute. They > > are paid to do write code that functions and move on > to the > > next thing. So taking time out to contribute to a > document > > is hardly on their mind. WPD is in a very slow-pace > area and > > we want contributors that really care about the > quality of > > their work. That quality comes at the cost of things > moving > > even slower. > > > > Things aren't dead, they are just stagnant. As WPD offers > > wider community engagement then hopefully we can > collect a > > few more core contributors that will make things not > seem so > > slow. I'd much rather have a handful of core contributors > > that do true quality work then an army of low-quality > > contributions that makes things seem more active. The > > content provided is far more useful in the end that way. > > > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Doug Schepers > > <schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org> > <mailto:schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>> wrote: > > > > Yes, Austin has been a really prolific contributor > > (thanks!), and we also have Nishanth Babu adding > > beginner DOM tutorials, among many other contributors > > and content. > > > > > > > > We've actually concentrated quite a lot on > > infrastructure over the last few months; Renoir > has done > > a great job. > > > > > > > > We're even adding over some new functionality, like > > specs.webplatform.org <http://specs.webplatform.org> > <http://specs.webplatform.org> > > that hosts more experimental specifications, and > adding > > a technical discussion area where developers and > > designers can ask questions about spec > development. Our > > emphasis is on closing the gap between standards > > development and developers. > > > > > > > > Regards– > > > > –Doug > > > > > > > > On 4/10/15 6:31 PM, Austin William Wright wrote: > > > > > > Slow maybe, not dead. Over the last month I've > > touched almost all the > > > > HTML element pages, merging duplicates, adding > > examples, correcting > > > > normative references, and importing data. > > > > > > > > I also noticed a great TLS/HTTPS upgrade, and > > MediaWiki upgrade, iirc. > > > > So even the server is getting love, it's not > just me. > > > > > > > > Austin Wright. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Ric Johnson > > <ric@opendomain.org > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org> <mailto:ric@opendomain.org > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>> > > > > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org> > > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org > <mailto:ric@opendomain.org>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > Is the WebPlatform project dead? I have not > > seen any progress in > > > > quite a while. > > > > > > > > I thought this was an amazing chance to help > > new developers learn > > > > web technologies, but it seems that we have > > dropped the ball. > > > > > > > > Is there anyone interested in kicking this > > project back on gear? > > > > > > > > Ric Johnson > > > > OpenDomain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Friday, 17 April 2015 03:24:10 UTC