– DRAFT –
WoT Marketing

Minutes

Feb-7

approved

PRs

Closed minor PRs

Ege: (goes through the PRs with "minor" label)

CG collaboration

draft policy

Kaz: can't see the MD above. also the MD should be installed on the wot-marketing repo later

Ege: (changes the permission)
… will put it on GitHub later
… (goes through the "Issues about Collaboration")

How CG makes suggestions to WG: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/363
How to handle the Twitter account: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/362
WoT Mastodon Account: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/360
Identifying topics: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/330
CG Handle some parts of the Website: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/321
Expectations: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/292
How to keep in sync: https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/294
CG Collab in the WG charter: https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pull/41

Issue 362

Issue 362 - How to handle the Twitter Account

Ege: Kaz suggested we clarify the ownership of each resource
… on the other hand, we can reference some information on another channel from each other
… any opinion about the basic working mechanism?

Kaz: as I mentioned to you, that would be important

Ege: tx

Cristiano: the separation is clear
… on the other hand, would like to have one specific place
… would not complain to the proposed method, though

Luca: identifying the resources using prefixes would be confusing
… probably we could use some hash tag instead
… also
… we could think about some aggregator mechanism
… possibly could provide some blog post as well
… to aggregate resources like retweeting

Kaz: so different groups should provide their resources using different channels
… then we can think about how to aggregate all the related information later

Luca: if you think about something like MATTER, people talk about it much. However, there is not much information about what MATTER itself is like, etc.

Ege: separation of channel is important
… but people tend to follow some specific channel, e.g., the main WoT channel
… so reposting related resources on the main channel would be useful

Cristiano: ok
… we'll split the resources for each group
… but it might cause some problem
… people may loose their interest in the end

Ege: note that currently I provide information using my private account
… but that's not ideal
… would be better to have another resolution

Cristiano: why don't we simply say this account is not only for the WoT WG but also all the WoT-related groups

Kaz: Please note that the WoT CG is a different group from the WoT WG
… WoT WG has its own resources and WoT CG also its own resources

Cristiano: what about aggregation?

Kaz: aggregation would be possible, I think
… but aggregation of related information is different from letting everybody use the same channel

Luca: wondering who owns what, and who want to use it
… we should agree on what our work on WoT Marketing means
… who is producing the content and who is promoting it
… the content should be completely split

Ege: unfortunately, we're out of time

<Ege> w3c/wot-marketing#362

Ege: would continue the discussion

[adjourned]