Re: R: moving to Community Group?

On 08/29/2011 10:18 PM, Goix Laurent Walter wrote:
>  From what i read it seems there may be different interests in continuing this group's activity.
>
> I can hear interests for producing specifications/standardizing some protocols to achieve federation (e.g. OStatus&  related protocols - the industry is asking for stable and referenced open specifications on this topic), and others more focused on creating/improving a community of developers around federated social web in general, to share experiences, propose new concepts or disruptive evolutions.
>
> I would be personally interested by both but I realize they may need different spaces to live in. What could be the best solution to achieve both these objectives within W3C?
>
> Regards
> Walter
>
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: public-xg-federatedsocialweb-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-federatedsocialweb-request@w3.org] Per conto di Andreas Kuckartz
> Inviato: sabato 27 agosto 2011 3.28
> A: public-xg-federatedsocialweb@w3.org
> Oggetto: Re: moving to Community Group?
>
> Am 26.08.2011 17:00, schrieb Evan Prodromou:
>> I'd like to suggest that we dip our toes in the water and move some
>> of the protocols that are under discussion in this group (like OStatus)
>> to community groups, and if it seems to make sense after those are
>> going, move this group, too.
> I fear that such a partial move might split the discussions a bit (and
> therefore the community) even if only temporarily. I am interested in a
> group of standards which is as coherent as possible and therefore think
> that a permanent common discussion ground is a good thing.
>
> And, btw, maybe we can begin to use some of the protocols (in addition
> to http and smtp) for such collaboration?

I think the best choice would be to just transition this group entirely 
to a Community Group as a general discussion forum - and give ourselves 
some concrete tasks. It seems there has been little momentum over 
test-cases, so maybe we should try to make a coherent architecture 
diagram, or try to get a actual engagement from say, the top 5 
code-bases, in terms of committing to some real test-cases?

Then for each spec idea then a new Community Group can be launched, and 
then once the spec matures it can be taken to either the IETF, W3C, or 
somewhere else as appropriate.

Efforts like the "New Social Web" should of course be reached out at and 
we should try to keep momentum going. I mean, "New Social Web" seems to 
an English teacher with 3,000 some "twitter" style followers. A good 
sign IMHO, but I can't find a link to separate code or specs [1]. In 
fact, he seems to be mostly tweeting about using Diaspora, Status.Net, 
and Friendika.

    cheers,
        harry

[1] https://drumbeat.org/en-US/projects/the-new-social-web-project/


> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
>
>
> Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.
>
> This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.
>

Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 20:35:29 UTC