Use shortname from W3C API

[w3c]

Use shortname from W3C API

[marcoscaceres]

Right, but we are conflating what users provide and how that gets translated into the http request/path. I'm saying that groups: "wg/whatever" or even "whatever-wg" the could become /w3c/groups/webapps/wg in the request.

[sidvishnoi]

Is there a chance that the shortnames clash may between WGs and CGs?

[dontcallmedom]

yes - more specifically, there are already cases of clashing shortnames between cg/wg

[sidvishnoi]

We presently add a -cg suffix to clashing names. If we populate groups.json using W3C API, there will be inconsistencies.
ReSpec doesn't expect users to tell us about the group type and only key users need to provide is shortname.

[dontcallmedom]

fair enough - maybe this isn't practical. Maybe having a consistency check for wgs would still be useful?

[sidvishnoi]

Is this something that can be done on W3C side?

I've only found 5 cases of clash:

['immersive-web', 109735, 'Immersive Web Working Group', 'WG'],
['immersive-web', 87846, 'Immersive Web Community Group', 'CG'],

['json-ld', 107714, 'JSON-LD Working Group', 'WG'],
['json-ld', 49174, 'JSON for Linking Data Community Group', 'CG'],

['timed-text', 34314, 'Timed Text Working Group', 'WG'],
['timed-text', 50119, 'Timed Text Community Group', 'CG'],

['wot', 63991, 'Web of Things Community Group', 'CG'],
['wot', 75874, 'Web of Things Interest Group', 'IG'],
['wot', 95969, 'Web of Things Working Group', 'WG'],

['xpath-next', 98025, 'XPath Next Community Group', 'CG'],
['xproc-next', 101103, 'XProc Next Community Group', 'CG'],

Is there a possibility that these group names can be changed?

FWIW, I liked how Publishing group handled this:

['publishing', 100074, 'Publishing Working Group', 'WG'],
['publishingbg', 97159, 'Publishing Business Group', 'BG'],
['publishingcg', 110591, 'Publishing Community Group', 'CG'],

[dontcallmedom]

My understanding is that it is intentional that different groups may share the same shortname as long as they have different types - in practice, the shortname is used as a slug in various URLs, with the assumption that the group type is also incorporated to avoid overlap.

So I don't think that design constraint to be lifted.

[sidvishnoi]

I see. I think we'll have to make the trade-off of requiring users to tell group type here. Maybe we can ask them to provide the type only in case of clashes. WDYT @marcoscaceres?

/w3c/groups/webapps     -> no clash, return 
/w3c/groups/wot         -> clash. return 404
/w3c/groups/wot/wg      -> okay
/w3c/groups/webapps/wg  -> for consistency

And in ReSpec:

group = "webapps" | "wot/wg" | "webapps/wg"

Complicates code a bit, but workable I think.

[marcoscaceres]

can we do:
"webapps" | "wot-wg" | "webapps-wg"

The "/" implies a hierarchy.

[sidvishnoi]

Some group names already have a - suffix, like "open-ui", so I wanted something other than -cg. - is kinda part of name and not a qualifier.
/ helps in keep this optional in the API URL. A : could be good maybe? Though I already merged #115

[marcoscaceres]

I could probably live with "/" but as a prefix... that would feel more natural "wg/webapps" for example.

[sidvishnoi]

Optional first argument (here first pathname parameter) kinda smells bad.

/w3c/groups/wg/webapps === /w3c/groups/webapps (backward compatibility and we don't want users to always specify group type) 
/w3c/groups/wot -> ambiguous
/w3c/groups/wg/wot -> okay

[sidvishnoi]

Ah. I misunderstood. This sounds good to me!