OK - I'll go push buttons.
There is no implied commitment from you and I completely understand the
limitations of contributors. The call for reviews is about gauging
support amongst W3C members (organizations) rather than binding commitment.
If any Shindig commiters wish to play an active part on the working
group and do not work for a W3C member organisation, then Apache can
sponsor participation in the working group.
Andy
On 10/06/14 22:06, Ryan Baxter wrote:
Hi Andy, I haven't heard any objections from anyone so lets assume
Shindig supports this, at least from a review perspective. I cannot
commit us to proving any implementation since we have a limited number
of committers and contributors. Of course those working on the w3c
side are welcome to contribute implementations to Shindig.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
On 10/06/14 12:45, Ryan Baxter wrote:
That is unfortunate. As I am sure you are aware we usually do things
via consensus and would take a vote on something like this. It is
very rare (in my observation) that one person speaks for the entire
community. I assume everyone will back it, but still it is better to
do things the "right way". I will wait until tonight until making any
decision to give everyone else the change to way in.
OK (I'm based in the UK so by 21:30 UTC (22:30 local) please)
Andy
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
On 10/06/14 02:13, Ryan Baxter wrote:
Thanks for reaching out Andy. Is there any way we can get an
extension on the deadline? I would like to put this out for a vote to
the Shindig community but we usually give everyone 3 days to review
and vote. Since there is a very short runway on this I am not sure
everyone will have time to review.
Not really - it's determined by W3C and because they have announced a
deadline they will be keen to stick to it.
This is just a request for support - it does not actually commit the
project
to do anything specific.
If you are implementing a spec, or a part of a spec, then not ticking the
first 3 "intends" would be routine.
You can include a brief (one sentence-ish) advertising for your work.
Andy
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi there,
W3C are looking for support in creating an Open Social WG.
ASF is a member of W3C and can express such support (I'm the W3C AC rep
for
Apache - I push web buttons).
I've had a request from Harry Halpin to add support - if this projects
wants
me to go ahead and express support, please let me know - the deadline
is
23:59, Boston time on 2014-06-10.
the question are below:
Activity:
http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-activity-proposal.html
Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html
Interst Group:
http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-ig-charter.html
The survey covers:
Q1::Support for the Proposal
(choose one - can add a comment):
My organization:
* supports this Activity Proposal as is.
* suggests changes to this Activity Proposal, but supports the proposal
whether or not the changes are adopted (your details below).
* suggests changes to this Activity Proposal, and only supports the
proposal
if the changes are adopted [Formal Objection] (your details below).
* opposes this Activity Proposal and requests that this group be closed
[Formal Objection] (your details below).
* abstains from this review.
Q2:: Support for Deliverables of the group
(choose any that apply - can add a comment)
My organization:
* intends to review drafts as they are published and send comments.
* intends to develop experimental implementations and send experience
reports (your details below).
* intends to develop products based on this work (your details below).
* intends to apply this technology in our operations.
* would be interested in participating in any press activity connected
with
this group.
Andy
VP W3C Relations.
