Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
Sorry for late reply but +1 from Apache community and Shindig contributor On Monday, June 9, 2014, Andy Seaborne 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. > >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
Please count me as an Apache supporter of this initiative. Craig McClanahan -- Forwarded message -- From: Andy Seaborne Date: Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:10 AM Subject: Apache support for W3C Open Social To: dev@shindig.apache.org 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.
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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 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 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 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.
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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 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 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 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. > >>> >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
Albeit a bit late: Sounds reasonable to me to at least provide input there. -- Andreas On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Andy Seaborne 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 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 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. > > >>> >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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 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 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.
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
I am also all for it. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Stanton Sievers wrote: > I'm all for it. I think the Shindig community can work in a review capacity > at least. > > Sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity or typos. > On Jun 10, 2014 7:46 AM, "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. > > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Andy Seaborne 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 > 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. > > >>> > > > > > >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
I'm all for it. I think the Shindig community can work in a review capacity at least. Sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity or typos. On Jun 10, 2014 7:46 AM, "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. > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Andy Seaborne 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 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. > >>> > > >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Andy Seaborne 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 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. >>> >
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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 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.
Re: Apache support for W3C Open Social
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. On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Andy Seaborne 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. >
