W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mw4d@w3.org > August 2009

MW4D Roadmap Document-- comments

From: Mira Slavova <mira@mmd4d.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:22:21 +0100
Message-ID: <4d9275350908100622q3e217594s58ea2097f79d6a8e@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-mw4d@w3.org
Dear All,

Thank you for the interesting discussion this afternoon! Below are some
comments I have on sections 1-5 of the existing draft. Please share your
views!

Cheers,
Mira

===================================================
Section 2, Paragraph 1-2: Even though the Digital Divide is a worthwhile
concept, I am not sure if it would give us the best opening. It seems to
have been replaced by concept such as "digital opportunity", "digital
provide" and "transformational technology". i would suggest opening with
something along these lines.

Section 2, Paragraph 3: The reference by Leonard Waverman, Meloria Meschi
and Melvyn Fuss of LBS is dated 2005 which I think is too old. It is also
based on measure on the macroeconomic scale which is probably inappropriate.
In terms of economic studies the ones by Jensen (India) and Muto (Uganda)
which are included on the page of resources I think demonstrate the benefit
of mobile technology. Another similar economic study is by Aker, a copy of
which I am attaching.

I am also attaching a copy of Jonathan Donner's recent article on the
blurring of livelihoods and lives in the use of mobile technology. I'm not
sure if he is somehow part of MW4D but I find his argument very convinsing.
I think his perspective is relevant to the write-up of the roadmap and he
even mentions the group explicitly. I think he might be a very interesting
guest contributor to our discussions.

Section 3: Even though the objectives are clearly stated I think this
section needs to become a bit tighter. I would suggest reducing it to 2
paragraphs, one for each objective. The last sentence might serve well as an
opening.

Section 4: I think this section also needs a bit of thightening. I think it
might be best if the content of the footnote in included in the sentence
opening the bullet list of audiences. The order of the list also seems to be
of significance. I suggest rewriting the list so that it consists of two
bullet points. Something along the lines of "technology developers" and
"international development community". Each point could list different
actors from the surrent list who might be pursuing the respective objective
of our roadmap. Thereby, the list of audiences will be congruent to the
stated objectives of the document. That will build some continuity between
sections 3 and 4.

Section 5: The name of the section is a bit of a misnomer. Essentially it
lists topics which are out of scope. I think this should be made clear in
the title and I would suggest positioning the section immediately before the
conclusion.






-- 
Dr Mira Slavova

ICT4D Consultant
Mobile Market Design 4 Development
mmd4d.org
++44 (0)7734 408829



-- 
Dr Mira Slavova

ICT4D Consultant
Mobile Market Design 4 Development
mmd4d.org
++44 (0)7734 408829


Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 13:22:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 10 August 2009 13:22:58 GMT