Talk:JSON Meta Application Protocol

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

jaudriga (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. ([1] 46:30h of [2])

Computing C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet C‑class Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

who's allowed to contribute?

OK, so I had a quick discussion with a FastMail tech in a ticket, and they say they are not going to contribute to the Wikipedia page for this because that would violate the Wikipedia terms. I disagreed, since this is a page for an open source project, and its success does not really financially benefit FastMail. If no one on the open source team can contribute to this, who will provide the tech specifics?

I read the FAQ for organizations, and I did not see a reason they could not contribute.

Anyway, this discussion has probably been had elsewhere, but I figured I would document it here. I edited this page earlier. I'm just an email user, and FastMail is an email service that I've used for several years. I think they started a nice project here, because I've had many headaches with IMAP in the past.

But this Wikpedia page could use more tech stuff, and people who are not involved with the project are more likely to get that wrong.

Just thought I would mention this.

Dan --100.4.151.25 (talk) 00:56, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally fine for those closely associated to edit, as long as they abide by the guidelines in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. There are a couple of "traps" that need to be avoided - one is pushing a PR line, (or being perceived to be doing so), and the other is relying upon "arguments from authority" because of inside knowledge - facts still need to be backed up with Reliable Sources. I imagine it can be intensely annoying to see others misunderstanding things - but a very bad idea to get grumpy about it. If in doubt, it's always safe to post here on the Talk page, and point other editors in the right direction. - Snori (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that reply. It might be helpful if the Conflict of interest page specifically mentioned this sort of project, because those guidelines are more concerned with profit-driven and agenda-driven topics where even minor changes in wording can add bias. I do agree with what you say here. Dan --100.4.149.195 (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am Joris Baum from audriga. We are not yet actively contributing to JMAP but are currently looking into it. Just to be safe I used the "request edit" and "connected contributor" templates for a minor edit of mine. Do you think that makes sense or is that kind of unnecessary (considering another Wikipedian now needs to spend his/her time reviewing my edit request)? Since the backlog seems quite high, and we might not have a 100% clear COI, could it make sense to edit the article directly after having waited for a while? - jaudriga (talk) 15:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add relation to iCalendar and vCard

It is requested that edits be made to the following semi-protected pages:

D (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
Sources are not reliable, sentence is confusing (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Information to be added: JMAP drafts dealing with contacts and calendars are accompanied by additional IETF drafts around JSCalendar [3] and JSContacts [4]. They are meant to be an alternative and, over time, successor of iCalendar and vCard.
Explanation of issue: Relation to JSCalendar, JSContact as well as iCalendar and vCard was not mentioned/clear before. Putting this on the talk page might be overengineered for this article/change, but I try to follow best practices as stated in [5]. (see also discussion above)
References supporting change: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jmap-jscontact/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-jscalendar/ and https://jmap.io/spec-calendars.html references JSCalendar.

Jaudriga (talk) 15:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. I declined the request because the proposed sentence is WP:PROMOTIONAL language that gives too much detail about a product and thus does not belong in this article. If you have any questions, please post below. Happy editing! Z1720 (talk) 17:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. That is perfectly fine. Thanks for your quick response! I am actually surprised I got such a fast reply :) . Since I am new to this: Could you maybe give me a hint what I could do better next time? For example, I am not sure which product you are referring to? You may be talking about the JSCalendar/JSContact standards, which could be seen as products of the Internet Engineering Task Force? Also, what are the sources lacking in your opinion? Jaudriga (talk) 08:04, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jaudriga:, one of the big problems I have with your sentence (and with the whole article) is that the language is too technical. I am rereading your proposed sentence and I still cannot fully understand what you are trying to tell the reader. I would suggest a rewrite of this article so that someone with basic computer knowledge would understand what this product/protocol/thing the article is talking about does. Also, we

For the sources, the datatracker links are not WP:RS because they are WP:PRIMARY sources. Although primary sources are allowed, when describing a product (as I think this protocol is a product) a secondary source should also be provided to show the notability of this information. Does a news article, product review or book talk about this process? This helps support your claim.

We have some WikiProjects with volunteers that have more specialised knowledge than I do: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing and Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet. If an editor from one of those projects wants to add the above sentence I will not object. They will also help with simplifying the language to make it more understandable to us.

Please post below if you have any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 14:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaudriga (talk • contribs) 15:18, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]