W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa@w3.org > August 2010

Re: RDFa, FUD and ethics

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:18:47 +0200
To: Christopher St John <ckstjohn@gmail.com>
Cc: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Public RDFa <public-rdfa@w3.org>, "Clark, Lin" <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <201008131118.47706.kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
On Monday 9. August 2010 23:02:59 Christopher St John wrote:
>   "It does not surface more data than what's already on
>    the page in HTML"[1]

Yeah, I can't see how that can't be true, but then, what do I know.

> Then how about a warning along the lines of:
> 
>  "Drupal defaults to being very open to optimize search
>  engine results and promote data reuse. You can make Drupal
>  more closed, but that might lower your search engine rankings.
>  Here's how to close it up."

Mmmm, I think a "warning" is not what you want, it is education, that data 
that are out there are out there, and it is a good thing. If you want privacy, 
you need more semweb tech (webid, trust networks, etc), not less.

The situation reminds me of the debacle following the announcement some years 
ago that flights to Oslo's airport Gardermoen (OSL) could essentially turn off 
the engines 20 minutes before landing, following considerable technological 
advances in Air Traffic Control. It was really a good thing, as considerable 
fuel would be saved and so less CO_2 emissions. Unfortunately, there was a 
public outcry "the airliners are trying to save a few bucks by compromising 
our safety". 

It is very unfortunate that one has to think about how to communicate it, but 
they did, and it is now known as "green landings" and is universally accepted 
as a good thing.

I think showing how this will enable new, strong privacy control regimes is 
the important part, not communicating how to turn it off.

Kjetil
Received on Friday, 13 August 2010 09:19:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 13 August 2010 09:19:26 GMT