There are multiple thought processes right now
Some want a WG which is wide in scope, some want narrow, some want shallow, some want deep.
The issue with a WG is that there will be a big inclusion and diversity problem, and there’s no real way round that.
A potential solution is the 3 step process, where the W3C decide publish things in the fediverse that have sufficient maturity.
A working group publication is a full spec, normally 10ish years of work, and gets the tag “W3C Recommendation”. That is a valuable thing for a lot of people. But for a foss community an equally good solution might be to publish a “note” in our own group. That doesnt take much effort, just a few clicks.
The question is what group to use. It could be the SWICG which is a catch-all for all things social, but has a wide, sometimes competitive focus.
Or to reopen the ActivityPub CG with a narrow focus but also coordinate with other group.