ActivityStreams extensions process

[cwebber]

The SocialCG has been given authority to add extensions to ActivityStreams. However, we haven't yet defined a process. We know that we have an ActivityStreams extension page, and now we support versioned contexts, but not much else is nailed down.

• What's the incubation process?
• What is the process to determine that an extension is official?

[sandhawke]

One interesting example is the IETF URN Community Registration process, described here: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8141#page-25

Other examples?

I'm thinking something like:

1. Someone makes a draft spec for the term(s). I'd expect it to be more than one sentence and less than 3 pages. Maybe we provide a template/outline.
2. They share it with the group for comments, reasonably addressing all comments. Comments must be constructive & helpful.
3. Once any and all comments are addressed, and things have been calm for a few days, and at least 14 days since the original proposal, it's registered and put in the namespace.

[strugee]

@sandhawke to be clear that's independent of any W3C process, correct? So it'd still have to go through the usual publication process for Notes?

[sandhawke]

Right. This doesn't involve any W3C publications or process. The one thing I think I'd suggest is that submitters make clear IPR statements, so the CG can take over if necessary and someday a WG can put the adopted extensions into a next version of AS.