W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > pics-interest@w3.org > February 2011

Re: What is the PICS labels for a site targeting to people over 16 years old?

From: Brian Kelly <b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 12:13:47 +0000
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Eduardo Lima Martinez <eduardolima@codecweb.com>, pics-interest@w3.org, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, Roessler Thomas <tlr@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9658B933-EC1A-49CF-8413-1067CE1577B4@ukoln.ac.uk>
To: Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>
I must admit I had forgotten that I was still on this list - or that  
it still existed.

Anyway I'm interested in what can be learnt from standards which have  
failed to take off. I don't know if W3C carry out such reflective  
activities but it does strike me that unless one learns from history  
one will be condemned to repeat mistakes.

is this an area, in which, as Phil suggests, standards aren't needed?   
Was the failure due to software vendors not being interested in  
providing support (in this case Microsoft did seem to have provided  
support)?  Is it because PICS didn't use XML?  Or other reasons?

Some thoughts - but no answers, at [1]

I'm interested is this area not because on any interest in content  
labelling as such, but in spotting standards which fail to be adopted  
-  see [2].

Brian Kelly,
UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, UK, BA2 87AY
Blog: htp://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/

1   http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/remember-pics-learning-from-standards-which-fail/
2  http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/feedback-invited-on-draft-copy-of-briefing-paper-on-selection-and-use-of-open-standards/

On 9 Feb 2011, at 22:05, Phil Archer wrote:

> Dan,
> Thanks for answering this so comprehensively and for including me. I  
> can't add anything useful to it at all.
> Eduardo - there really isn't any advantage in adding labels, whether  
> in PICS or POWDER, for child protection purposes. All the filters  
> that people actually use work well without using labels at all. It's  
> an idea that has long had its day. If interested, see [1, 2]
> Everyone - I do worry that POWDER is always associated with this. I  
> tried so hard for it not to be. I'm hoping a paper that one of the  
> guys at NCSR Demokritos wrote (that I added just enough to to add my  
> name to as well) will be accepted for ESWC. It talks about how  
> they've used POWDER to significantly increase query performance in  
> Sesame. That's more like a proper, long-term use for it in my view!
> Phil
> [1] http://philarcher.org/diary/html5-pc/
> [2] http://philarcher.org/icra/ICRAfail.pdf
> On 09/02/2011 10:50, Dan Brickley wrote:
>> On 9 February 2011 09:20, Eduardo Lima Martinez
>> <eduardolima@codecweb.com>  wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>> I'm building a website for people over 16 years of age. This not  
>>> is a
>>> porn site, but shows raw images ("curcus pretty girls doing ugly
>>> things") not suitable for kids...
>>> http://www.circusdivas.com/
>>> What are the correct PICS labels for this site?. I do not read/write
>>> correctly the english language.
>>> I do not understand the terms of HTTP headers "Protocol: {...}" and
>>> "PICS-Label: (...)"
>>> Can you guide me? Can you show me a sample site that has the correct
>>> PICS labels?
>>> Thank you very much !!!
>> In 2011 PICS is largely obsolete technology.
>> Most of the core functionality of PICS has been rebuilt around RDF
>> (see http://www.w3.org/RDF/ ) ...
>> 1. Roughly PICS label schemes are now RDF Schemas (or more  
>> powerfully,
>> OWL Ontologies)
>> 2. PICS Label Bureaus are replaced by Web services that speak W3C's
>> SPARQL language for querying RDF - see
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
>> 3. PICS' ability to make labels for all pages sharing a common URL
>> pattern is addressed by POWDER - see
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/
>> However, these RDF technologies are not (yet?) widely used for PICS
>> original use case.
>> In the PICS world, RSACi ( see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_Software_Advisory_Council )
>> became ICRA ( see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Content_Rating_Association )  
>> who
>> became part of FOSI (http://www.fosi.org/icra/) and who no longer  
>> have
>> any activities in this technology area, or support for their older
>> work. So there is no direct modern successor to the RSACi/ICRA PICS
>> work to recommend to you.
>> That said, perhaps eg. Internet Explorer still supports the old 1990s
>> work. Perhaps others can comment further?
>> Hope this helps,
>> Dan
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2011 12:18:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:43:10 UTC