With respect to #ActivityPub:
Simply, having now seen more into the guts of the process and how it is managed both historically and today, and understanding how the w3c works, I have no faith in their ability to define a clear consensus way forward out of the current set of problems.
Not "no faith in <timeline>" but no faith in the ability to define a clear way forward here.
This doesn't mean that someone outside of w3c couldn't define a better way forward, even one using AP, but w3c won't.
Hrefna (DHC)
in reply to Hrefna (DHC) • • •One way forward:
Someone defines a way forward within the FEP process. Not as in a static document, but builds a working group "chartered" by a FEP ( @smallcircles would appreciate this, I think).
But ultimately we're looking at needing a "AP2" and that is a fundamentally broken prospect looking at the w3c processes today. Even if they could produce such I have no faith that the problems are understood or that the right people would be in the room.