Merge pull request #658 from bytecodealliance/docs-08-13

sig-docs 08-13-2025 notes

Author: kate-goldenring

SIG-Documentation/2025/docs-08-13.md

@@ -12,12 +12,38 @@
 
 ## Attendees
 
-* TODO
+* Tim Chevalier
+* Kate Goldenring
+* Mikhail Katychev
+* Danny Macovei
+* Victor Adossi
 
 ## Notes
 
-* TODO
+* Tim Revised 3rd and 4th sections of the component model book and the c# section. Planning to go through the rest of the book as well.
+* Tim: Still work to do around examples
+* Danny: Some of the recent refactoring could make using the WIT in a registry work. We need to just make sure the cargo component instructions are updated. Danny anticipates having more time to update it in the next week or two
+* Mikhail: Any changes for that that needs to be done in wkg?
+* Danny: No changes. But WAC can still only use warg
+* Victor: Merged changes to C quide
+* Mikhail: Had a coworker get confused between the difference between a target dependency and a dependency
+* Danny: People who like cargo component, like that it takes on more stuff than the p2 target. Cargo component doesn't have people who are regularly adding features so this may be the best place to socialize issues
+* Mikhail: Where should this be explained?
+* Kate: I think it should live closer to the source so in the cargo component repo
+* Victor: I think it should live in both places -- cargo component docs and component book. 
+* Danny: We should talk to Alex and Pat about the future they see for cargo component. Right now, if you want to build a component from a wit package in a registry, it lets you do so without using wkg.
+* Victor: As long as we have cargo component as the thing as we use, we should represent footguns early. The guide should be simple and breezy -- a good intro to wasm.
+* Kate: Sounds like we should have "keep it simple and breezy and a good intro to components" as a north star. Documenting in both places SGTM. There has been a lot of uncertainty of how much to commit to cargo component given it's maintenance status. P3 is coming soon too. Maybe we invite Alex or Pat to our next meeting to get their thoughts on the future of documenting developing components with Rust.
+* Victor: Can we set up analytics
+* Kate: We have analytics on Plausible. Kate pinged David to get information on how to access the data: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/component-docs/issues/157
+* Victor: Should we put examples in the repo? Seems like we should if it is a guide. We should test those files with commits to component docs
+* Kate: We haven't made progress moving the examples to their own repos so keeping it in repo where there is less barriers and keeping the code tested SGTM.
+* Victor: Should we add Pat as a reviewer to the component docs repo?
+* Kate: Since he has been doing regular reviews, it seems like a normal progression to elevate him if we wants\
+* Mikhail: Update on syntax highlighting
 
 ## Action Items
 
-* [ ] TODO
+* [ ] Victor: Reach out to Pat about becoming a reviewer
+* [ ] Kate: Reach out to Alex about presenting about "future of component docs / rust docs for p3"
+* [ ] Kate: Upload previous youtube video from when OOF