The new W3C #ActivityPub Working Group is not that. Or not just that. It's a "Social Web" Working Group and includes maintenance of ActivityPub, WebSub, Activity Streams, Activity Vocabulary, MicroPub, Linked Data Notifications, Webmention, and LOLA specifications. Maintaining all these disparate specs in one WG seems like it will lead to similar results as the first time this was tried (not great). What's that saying about doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results? 🙃
On the W3C SocialCG mailing list, I saw that
@evanEvan Prodromou wrote "The WG ... is focused on a narrow core: Activity Streams and ActivityPub." The WG charter describes a much broader scope. What am I missing?
If you have a fediverse account, you can quote this note from your own instance. Search https://mastodon.social/users/eyeinthesky/statuses/115932293629083059 on your instance and quote it. (Note that quoting is not supported in Mastodon.)