Groups as social entities Re: data.fm / rww.io

Ooops an apparently unsent mail

On 2014-07 -13, at 06:24, Tim Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Andrei,
> 
> I’ve started testing / using rww.io with cimba[1], for creating weblogs essentially…  
> 
> I was wondering whether you’ve got any suggestions around creating data spaces for projects, rather than persons.  So; say - i want to create a weblog / microblog listing rww apps (webized apps?).  
> 
> Channel structure is currently;
> 
> Identity: > Channel. 
> 
> Say the identity isn’t a legal entity but rather a project - so, the WebID relates to a DOAP[2] profile? 
> 
> Have you got any thoughts about how something like - http://rwwapps.rww.io/ could be created, that then associates to different WebID’s (i.e. deiu, melvin, etc.) , for the purpose of allowing ‘wiki’ like functionality?   Meaning - a bunch of contributors could add / append content - perhaps an administrator could remove content?  Have you got any example TTL that would do it?

This is an interesting an important requirement, and associated with it some interesting design decisions..

One model  -- Individual Ownership -- is that

- Everything has to be owned at core by one person (or legal entity -- something which can have a credit card).
- The owner creates the blog, declaring it to be about the DOAP project
- The owner allocates permissions to others, including groups, such as any developer of the project.
- The owner can transfer ownership 
This is like unix file system in which files are owned by users.
This basically leverages the existing world's view of what a social entity is.

Another model is say -- Lightweight Organization -- that you can create lightweight  groups which have their own right to create things. This is like a Github or an IRC channel.

- Any social entity can create a new group
- The creator can give others membership and any level of rights
- Once the group is created, power is shared between the members
- The original creator can lose privileges and leave the etc, they are not key to its survival.

Maybe we should build both.



> 
> Perhaps therein; If an App is required to do it, perhaps some mechanism around sending ‘approve/deny’ messages to listed ‘stakeholders’ - beyond the scope of the original question…  I’m just not sure if their is a practical way rww.io / data.fm is being used in this way already…. 
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> Tim.H.
> 
> [1] http://cimba.co/
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOAP