- From: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:28:38 +0300
- To: Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com>
- Cc: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, abhimanyu0003 <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABc02_JgF0_=Ay6Sk0919gPR1aY-_iLXBC8S3qgkgb3qOXj1rw@mail.gmail.com>
There is this thing- https://developers.google.com/+/api/pages-signup But someone has to sign up on behalf of WebPlatform.org and the actual API reference is missing. ☆*PhistucK* On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Russell <sgtpooki@gmail.com> wrote: > G+ has no api last I've heard. I completely agree that facebook will get > more exposure, but I completely disagree that g+ is dead. We should do > both.. And I would love to help with marketing and publicity but would not > be best for the captain of those efforts in the long term. > > I think Abhimanyu has already kind of taken off with the facebook lead and > we have quite a few interested parties already.. My recommendation would be > to keep it open, but active. Maybe myself and Abhimanyu can simply motivate > people to share more? > > Btw, This is the most active I've ever seen the mailing list. > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 9:39 AM PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am not familiar with their APIs, sorry (and I do not volunteer to >> implement such a bot, either). I imagine so, though. >> If we end up implementing this kind of bot, then I guess any objection is >> moot because everyone can just keep posting to the venue most comfortable >> for them without losing any information. >> >> >> ☆*PhistucK* >> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> Sounds like a good idea. Could we do that for both Facebook and G+? >>> >>> On 4/17/15 9:27 AM, PhistucK wrote: >>> >>>> Should there be a bot that collects the posts and comments and publishes >>>> them on a mailing list (and maybe also the other way around)? >>>> >>>> >>>> ☆*PhistucK* >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:56 AM, abhimanyu0003 >>>> <abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org <mailto:abhimanyu@japanaddicts.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> __ >>>> Thanks for accepting this proposal. G+ is not better than Facebook, >>>> they're both the same (with Facebook's membership times more than >>>> G+'). There are many technical groups on Facebook too, you probably >>>> have just not looked. Their differences don't matter, they're both >>>> the same. >>>> >>>> I also agree that we need proper marketing and publicising but >>>> first, we'll need to make the group active and add as many members >>>> from WPD as we can. Here's the URL, so if you have a Facebook >>>> account, just visit it. >>>> >>>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/WebPlatformOfficial/ >>>> >>>> I could publicise it in appropriate places, but I'm not sure that >>>> will be very helpful when we've just begun. First we have to >>>> establish some authority, so that when people look, they know that >>>> we mean serious content. A new group won't give that impression, so >>>> let's stay away from publicising right now (however, we can use >>>> technical forums to target aspiring members saying that we're new >>>> and need members, that'll be a totally different thing). >>>> >>>> --- >>>> </Abhimanyu> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---- On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:54:05 +0530 *Doug Schepers >>>> <schepers@w3.org <mailto:schepers@w3.org>>* wrote ---- >>>> >>>> >>>> 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> <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> >>>> > <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> >>>> > <mailto: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> >>>> > <mailto: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>> >>>> > > <mailto: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>> >>>> > <mailto: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>> >>>> > <mailto: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> >>>> > <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>>> >>>> > > >>>> > > <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 <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 16:29:55 UTC