Developing the 1.0 specification in Wave

[Paul Jones]

Hi,

Of those interested in participating in the 1.0 specification development, does anyone not yet have a Google Wave account? I've started assembling the first draft of the 1.0 specification there, and I'd like to see how it works out for a non-formal initial phase of shaping up the specification. I have a few invites left that I could provide to anyone wanting to participate but currently unable to access it.

If there are major objections to attempting to do this this way, please let me know.

Otherwise, for anyone else that would like to participate, please provide me with your wave username in either public or private reply, and I'll add you to the wave.

As an initial set of development guidelines:

• Only add comments to the document, don't edit the actual content - to prevent things getting into too much of a sprawling mess, I'd like to maintain actual editorial control of the base document. If we try to thread discussions inline, then they can be rolled in systematically to the document;
• Comments will be deleted once they reach a natural conclusion and that conclusion has been rolled into the document;
• We'll keep the wave private, simply so as to moderate the entry of participants, and hopefully avoid spam;

Thanks,
Paul.

[Ash Angell]

Me please (you already have the address).

Ash

2009/11/29 Paul Jones <paulj...@gmail.com>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "APML.Public.General" group.
To post to this group, send email to apml-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to apml-public...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/apml-public?hl=en.

[Matthias Pfefferle]

I would love to participate the 1.0 specification development. My
Google-Wave account is pfef...@googlewave.com

Thanks,
Matthias

On 29 Nov., 13:05, Paul Jones <pauljone...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Of those interested in participating in the 1.0 specification development,
> does anyone not yet have a Google Wave account? I've started assembling the
> first draft of the 1.0 specification there, and I'd like to see how it works
> out for a non-formal initial phase of shaping up the specification. I have a
> few invites left that I could provide to anyone wanting to participate but
> currently unable to access it.
>
> If there are major objections to attempting to do this this way, please let
> me know.
>
> Otherwise, for anyone else that would like to participate, please provide me
> with your wave username in either public or private reply, and I'll add you
> to the wave.
>
> As an initial set of development guidelines:
>

>    - Only add comments to the document, don't edit the actual content - to

>    prevent things getting into too much of a sprawling mess, I'd like to
>    maintain actual editorial control of the base document. If we try to thread
>    discussions inline, then they can be rolled in systematically to the
>    document;

>    - Comments will be deleted once they reach a natural conclusion and that

>    conclusion has been rolled into the document;

>    - We'll keep the wave private, simply so as to moderate the entry of

[Elias Bizannes]

Me too please. I think I'm Elias.Bizannes on it.

Sent by one of those damn iPhones

On Nov 29, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Matthias Pfefferle <pfef...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Mason Lee]

Hi Paul,

In my experience, Wave is maintaining more document history than is useful and does not have a refined user experience.  I'd prefer using Google Groups.  If all we need is threaded comments and are not supposed to simultaneously edit the main doc, don't we already have what we need in Google Groups and the APML wiki?

That said, if you really want to use it-- How are you getting notifications that a Wave has been modified?  Do I need to install something like this?  http://blog.yakitara.com/2009/10/unofficial-google-wave-notifier-for-mac.html

Cheers,

Mason

[Paul Jones]

Hi Mason,

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Mason Lee <maso...@gmail.com> wrote:

In my experience, Wave is maintaining more document history than is useful and does not have a refined user experience.  I'd prefer using Google Groups.  If all we need is threaded comments and are not supposed to simultaneously edit the main doc, don't we already have what we need in Google Groups and the APML wiki?

I actually quite like the amount of history that it keeps. I find the visual diff playback quite useful - to be honest, it just never quite felt right on the other wiki sites. However, the main key difference I've found is the inline commenting. None of the other tools (that I know of) support this kind of functionality. The ability to add the comments inline, thread them, then delete them when its all done makes a huge difference to the kind of workflow that can be constructed around it.

 

That said, if you really want to use it-- How are you getting notifications that a Wave has been modified?  Do I need to install something like this?  http://blog.yakitara.com/2009/10/unofficial-google-wave-notifier-for-mac.html

Personally, I just open my Wave client occasionally to see if anything has changed. But I also have a few waves on the go, so it usually tends to be worth the trouble. I've seen lots of notifiers though, so I have no doubt one of them will be usable. What would probably be the most interesting would be if somehow a bot could be put together that sent a changeset summary to the group each day. Perhaps I'll look into that at some point.

Does this in some way answer your concerns about wave? As I said in my original email, I'd just like to trial it as a way of collaborating on getting the first solid draft of the spec together - after that is done, we can re-assess and move it to a different process.

Thanks,
Paul.

[Elias Bizannes]

It certainly will be the first time a widely-deployed spec has been developed in this way, will be interesting to see.

Elias Bizannes
http://eliasbizannes.com

[Paul Jones]

I'm certainly not saying it will definitely work either - I'd just
like to give it a shot.

On Monday, November 30, 2009, Elias Bizannes <elias.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It certainly will be the first time a widely-deployed spec has been developed in this way, will be interesting to see.
> Elias Bizannes
> http://eliasbizannes.com
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Paul Jones <paulj...@gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'paulj...@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mason,
>

> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Mason Lee <maso...@gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'maso...@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>
> In my experience, Wave is maintaining more document history than is useful and does not have a refined user experience.  I'd prefer using Google Groups.  If all we need is threaded comments and are not supposed to simultaneously edit the main doc, don't we already have what we need in Google Groups and the APML wiki?
>
>
> I actually quite like the amount of history that it keeps. I find the visual diff playback quite useful - to be honest, it just never quite felt right on the other wiki sites. However, the main key difference I've found is the inline commenting. None of the other tools (that I know of) support this kind of functionality. The ability to add the comments inline, thread them, then delete them when its all done makes a huge difference to the kind of workflow that can be constructed around it.
>
> That said, if you really want to use it-- How are you getting notifications that a Wave has been modified?  Do I need to install something like this?  http://blog.yakitara.com/2009/10/unofficial-google-wave-notifier-for-mac.html
>
>
> Personally, I just open my Wave client occasionally to see if anything has changed. But I also have a few waves on the go, so it usually tends to be worth the trouble. I've seen lots of notifiers though, so I have no doubt one of them will be usable. What would probably be the most interesting would be if somehow a bot could be put together that sent a changeset summary to the group each day. Perhaps I'll look into that at some point.
>
> Does this in some way answer your concerns about wave? As I said in my original email, I'd just like to trial it as a way of collaborating on getting the first solid draft of the spec together - after that is done, we can re-assess and move it to a different process.
>
> Thanks,
> Paul.
>
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "APML.Public.General" group.

> To post to this group, send email to apml-...@googlegroups.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'apml-...@googlegroups.com');>.

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to apml-public...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/apml-public?hl=en.
>
>
>

> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "APML.Public.General" group.

> To post to this group, send email to apml-...@googlegroups.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'apml-...@googlegroups.com');>.

[Mason Lee]

Give it the shot then :) I'll get a notifier.

> To post to this group, send email to apml-...@googlegroups.com.