[okfn-br] pedido de caixa postal @ok.org, ou @member.fsf.org ou outro...

Quarta Abril 1 12:12:05 UTC 2015

Peter

Todos são bem vindos aos community groups do W3C!
Seria muito bom se você entrasse :-) E quem mais se animar por aqui.

Se preferir, quando se apresentar, pode falar que é voluntário na OKBr e
que foi indicado por mim para entrar no grupo.  Ou podemos entrar juntos no
Grupo. Eu não faço parte ainda, mas é até bom que eu participe porque sou
chair do WG de Data on the Web, então, faz sentido.

Me adiciona ai nos talks da vida, yasodara.cordova em gmail.com, e bora trocar
uma idéia mais tarde, podemos coordenar pra trabalhar juntos pelo WG.

Que tal?

Na escuta,

yaso

∞ w3c.br <http://w3c.br>
∞ ingraxa.eu

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Peter Krauss <ppkrauss em gmail.com> wrote:

> Prezados,
>
> Não é para já, mas vai ser relevante: algumas formas de participação
> exigem "se expor em nome da OKBr"... Precisa ser "alguém de confiança da
> OKBr", que ainda não é meu caso, pois confiança se conquista com calma...
> por isso digo "vai ser relevante"... Quando? Condições? Vale para todos os
> membros? (precisa pagar anualidade?) Coloco para o grupo.
>
> Tenho dois problemas:
>
> 1. Não sou ninguém perante o W3C, seria "mais reputado" se usasse a grife
> OKBr através de uma caixa postal @OKBr-qualquer. Posteriormente, se
> sucesso, poderíamos candidatar a própria OKBr como entidade-membro do *Schema.org
> Community Group.*
>
> 2. Tenho participado nas horas vagas, e senti que dá trabalho (!)
> sobretudo para não "queimar o filme": meu inglês é ruim, preciso de
> apoiadores me monitorando/corrigindo de vez em quando... Exemplos:
> schemaorg/issues/405 <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/405>,
> schemaorg/issues/280
> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/280#issuecomment-75565671>
> ,  schemaorg/issues/401
> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/401>. Alias, quem quiser
> ajudar por favor contribua com WikidataIDs na planilha da issue 280 (!).
>
> *Abaixo a situação oficial*: aos poucos o SchemaOrg está reduzindo o grau
> de comprometimento com os *sponsors* <http://schema.org/docs/terms.html> (Google,
> Yahoo, Bing e cia) e assumindo maior compromisso (democrático!) com a
> comunidade e o W3C...
> Ontem, 31/3, foi oficialmente criada a *Schema.org Community Group*
> dentro do W3C (!)...
> Ainda é bastante e assumidamente informal
> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/403>, como Abdo e Oda
> gostam  ;-)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Dan Brickley <danbri em google.com>
> Date: 2015-04-01 6:56 GMT-03:00
> Subject: Re: Proposed W3C Community Group for Schema.org
> To: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs em w3.org>
> Cc: Ralph Swick <swick em w3.org>
>
>
> Update: the group has been approved and created:
> https://www.w3.org/community/schemaorg/
>
> Do please join up if you're interested in the finer detail of
> schema.org collaboration. We'll continue to to make heavy use of
> Github for issue tracking (i.e.
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues ) and will also keep
> public-vocabs in-the-loop, but once the new extensions model is
> implemented (next week or so) I suggest using the Community Group as
> the default schema.org mailing list rather than public-vocabs.
>
> As a reminder the next release of schema.org is codenamed sdo-gozer,
> and the list of issues (63 open) currently tagged against it is at
>
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22sdo-gozer+release%22
>
> We'll probably push a few of those open issues off into a subsequent
> release so if you've opinions on the urgency or best resolution for
> any of the issues listed, do jump in right away via Github.
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>
> On 31 March 2015 at 19:00, Dan Brickley <danbri em google.com> wrote:
> > A quick note about a proposed Community Group for Schema.org at W3C,
> > and its relationship with this list.
> >
> > The public-vocabs list is nearly 4(!) years old already. Since late
> > 2011 it has been framed as the mailing list for W3C's "Web Schemas"
> > task force of the Semantic Web Interest Group (charter at
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/webschema.html).
> >
> > During these last years those of us in the schema.org project have
> > used the Web Schemas group and the public-vocabs em w3.org list as the
> > primary list for day-to-day schema.org discussions. We have
> > experimented with various collaboration mechanisms during that time,
> > most recently by moving to an opensource codebase and extensive use of
> > Github [1]. As we prepare to launch the recently announced extensions
> > mechanism [2] we have realised that there is a need for a more
> > dedicated Schema.org-specific forum that can be used to coordinate and
> > discuss schema.org extensions.
> >
> > Therefore I have just filed a proposal for a new W3C "Schema.org
> > Community Group", described as follows:
> >
> > "The Schema.org Community Group provides a forum for discussing all
> > changes, additions and extensions to schema.org. In addition to
> > providing a public setting for the day to day operation of the
> > project, it serves as the mechanism for reviewing extensions and as a
> > liaison point for all parties developing independent extensions to the
> > schema.org core."
> >
> > There is naturally some overlap with this broader public-vocabs group,
> > but the idea is that we will migrate all the more intense and detailed
> > schema.org collaboration discussions into the new Community Group
> > (while continuing to rely on Github to bring structure to our
> > discussions and sanity to our inboxes).
> >
> > I hope many of the regular contributors to public-vocabs discussions
> > will join and continue in the CG, and that public-vocabs will continue
> > in the role initially outlined, i.e. as a high level meeting place for
> > all efforts to bring structured data schemas into the Web.
> >
> > It looks like we only need one more person to vote for the group (we
> > have 4/5 already) before it will be brought into existence. Which
> > reminds me to emphasise that W3C Community Groups in general provide a
> > great mechanism for topical schema discussions, whether schema.org
> > oriented (like BibExtend, [4]) or otherwise. I'll keep this list
> > updated as things get set up...
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues
> > [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2015Mar/0117.html
> > [3]
> https://www.w3.org/community/blog/2015/03/31/proposed-group-schema-org-community-group/#comment-55733
> > https://www.w3.org/community/groups/proposed/#schemaorg
> > [4] https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-br mailing list
> okfn-br em lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-br
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-br
>
>
-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-br/attachments/20150401/4e1e8ff2/attachment-0005.html>