- From: Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 12:36:39 +1000
- To: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
- Cc: Mauro Nunez <mauro@w3.org>
On 5 Feb 2009, at 09:04, Toby A Inkster wrote: > In order of interest (highest first), probably: > > - Interoperability Task Force > - Distributed Architectures Task Force > - Privacy and Trust Task Force > > I think that interoperability is a prerequisite for a distributed > architecture, and that privacy will be necessary for people to be > able to trust such an architecture. Which brings me to the main > reason I think one XG should be set up - all the areas of work are > somewhat dependent on each other, and it's important for there to be > one overall group to guide the work on all the areas, even if for the > most part they work separately for practical reasons (e.g. avoiding > massive teleconferences). I agree and support this.... Let me be a bit radical here - based on co-chairing a current W3C XG [1] and an IG [2].... I suggest 1 XG focussed on "Social Networks Interoperability" - as this is core of the problem (and leads to addressing other issues....such as distributed architectures...) - and is closest to the pre-standardisation work that incubators were originally devised for. I also suggest that the Privacy and Trust work move to the PLING [2] - there are already experts there - and they are also keen on Social Networks... Cheers... Renato Iannella NICTA [1] <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/wiki/Main_Page> [2] <http://www.w3.org/Policy/pling/wiki/Main_Page>
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 02:38:38 UTC