W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-social-web-talk@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Mobile Across all aspects and deliverables of Social Web XG

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:10:38 -0500 (EST)
To: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
Cc: "'Renato Iannella'" <renato@nicta.com.au>, public-social-web-talk@w3.org, "'Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group'" <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0902271106070.19830@tribal>
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Christine Perey wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Harry Halpin wrote:
>
>> Second, we do have a few mobile phone people involved.
>
> Most people, while users of mobile phones, are not mobile phones themselves
> ;-).
>
> I think what you wish, and it is laudable, is for those list subscribers
> (those on this mailing list who were at one point involved in the discussion
> by way of the workshop in Barcelona) with mobile-centric or mobile focus
> agendas to feel included and that their concerns will be addressed in a
> narrowly focused XG.
>
>> In the smaller proposed charter [2]
>
> [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/SocialWebXGCharter
> [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/UnifiedSocialXG
>
> I have visited [2] and the charter [2] is the EXPANDED charter.
> Meaning, [2] is the one which has the task forces outlining different topics
> of interest within the large scope of Social Networking and which I believe
> needs to be given a chance. It may not float/pass the final test when put to
> a vote of the AC, however, with some work and the participation of a
> sufficient number of people, [2] could be submitted for consideration as a
> new XG to W3C.

Again, the issue with [2] is that I it's grown so big, and all my attempts 
to make it smaller  have not been met with approval by you or Tim, such 
that I am not sure what to do.

Ideally, we would re-merge [1] and [2] with a smaller number of 
deliverables (Again, I'd max out around 5) and a more tight focus. If one 
of those is a report on the mobile arena, that could be very useful and I 
would be in support of it. I am thinking that might subsume User 
Experience/Contextual Data or be the same as those. The lack of activity 
around those has been noticed though.

>> it might be feasible to add a report that focuses specifically on the
> future of *mobile* social
>> networking.
>> Although I strongly believe in one Web that steps across mobile and
> non-mobile
>> boundaries, a report that details the advantages of mobile networking,
> accessibility, and how
>> the W3C can co-ordinate future work in this area could be useful.
>
> Are you putting a new deliverable on the table for discussion?
>
> My hope (what I sought to express in an Activity by Topic Matrix previously)
> is that ALL the topics and deliverables of the Social Web XG will take into
> account the special circumstances of users accessing via mobile
> technology/networks. This could be done with the contributions of "mobile
> phone people" as well as with the Mobile Web Initiative participation.
>
> In other words, when a deliverable is outlined, it should plan to treat (and
> in the task force then work through) the actual or potential differences to
> be taken into account when considering the user's *access* technology. I
> guess everyone knows that handsets which do not support mobile browsing
> still dominate and support the social networking experiences of many people
> but are not considered included in the scope of this charter since they are
> not accessing the "Web".
>
>> However, in the second,
>> larger proposed charter [2], there "contextual data" and "user experience"
> volunteers are
>> missing, and the charter is basically empty. Perhaps there is a lack of
> interest from the
>> mobile community, despite their heavy presence at the workshop? If not, now
> would be a
>> good time to speak up.
>
> I fear that you have drawn an incorrect conclusion here.
>
> There is not a lack of interest on this topic from the mobile community.
> Quite the contrary, there are some (12 community operators as of Monday of
> this week) who are not waiting for the W3C to pay attention to this
> important topic of context and location, etc, and who have already
> established an interoperability protocol/alliance.
>
> It is called Open Sharing of Location-Based Objects (OSLO).

Good luck to them, and hopefully they decide to help. Again, I am just 
looking at people who have been added or added themselves to [2].

> Please see [4] for the announcement of their alliance. This alliance is
> needed because industry bodies which could play a role move slowly by
> comparison with nimble companies who have users of contextual data today.

Well, given that all previous efforts in this sort of area to my knowledge 
haven't worked too well, I am a fan of an organized process rather than 
just starting new bodies at the drop of a hat, but hopefully if they keep 
going we can communicate and work together.


> [3] 
http://www.perey.com/W3C_Activity_by_Topic_Matrix.html > [4]
> http://www.aka-aki.com/press-files/mitteilungen/EN/02232009_oslo_alliance.pd
> f
>
> Christine
>
> cperey@perey.com
> mobile (Swiss): +41 79 436 68 69
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-social-web-talk-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Harry Halpin
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 9:54 AM
> To: Renato Iannella
> Cc: public-social-web-talk@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposal: Keep Group Unified, Don't Divide into Taskforces
>
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Renato Iannella wrote:
>
>>
>> On 26 Feb 2009, at 19:57, Harry Halpin wrote:
>>
>>> I feel the proposed charter may be too large, due to having too many
>>> deliverables (15 at my last count). A smaller charter with (5)
>>> deliverables was written earlier.
>>
>>
>> I agree with Harry, and I indicated so earlier [1] - from my current
>> experiences in running an XG.
>>
>> This is not to say that what was has been proposed is not valuable,
>> but taken in the context of a W3C Incubator Group, the current scope
>> is significantly more than most W3C multi-year multi-working group
> Activities.
>>
>> Event the smaller charter [2] can be modified to include the core outputs:
>> 1 - Use Case/Requirements
>> 2 - State-of-the-Art Report (best practices)
>> 3 - Final Report (next steps)
>>
>> I also strongly believe that the Policy/Privacy/Trust work simply be
>> moved to the W3C PLING Interest Group (as argued in [1]) as the
>> evaluation of the XG Charter [3] stipulates:
>
> Note that I concur here, as PLING has extensive experience in this area.
> Another option is that PLING could write it in joint with the Social Web XG,
> if there are experts that are part of Social Web XG but not PLING.
> However, it might be simpler just to have those experts joing PLING.
>
> Second, we do have a few mobile phone people involved. In the smaller
> proposed charter [2] it might be feasible to add a report that focuses
> specifically on the future of *mobile* social networking. Although I
> strongly believe in one Web that steps across mobile and non-mobile
> boundaries, a report that details the advantages of mobile networking,
> accessibility, and how the W3C can co-ordinate future work in this area
> could be useful. However, in the second, larger proposed charter [2], there
> "contextual data" and "user experience" volunteers are missing, and the
> charter is basically empty. Perhaps there is a lack of interest from the
> mobile community, despite their heavy presence at the workshop? If not, now
> would be a good time to speak up.
>
> [1] http://esw.w3.org/topic/SocialWebXGCharter
> [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/UnifiedSocialXG
>
>
>> "It is desirable to take ideas related to specific technology
>> solutions that are already being worked on elsewhere (within or
>> outside of the W3C) back to the place in which the work is taking place"
>>
>> I suspect this will be a major discussion point at the teleconference
>> next week.
>>
>> Cheers...  Renato Iannella
>> NICTA
>>
>> [1]
>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-social-web-talk/2009Feb/00
>> 46.html> [2] <http://esw.w3.org/topic/SocialWebXGCharter>
>> [3] <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/about.html#Scope>
>>
>
>

-- 
 				--harry

 	Harry Halpin
 	Informatics, University of Edinburgh
         http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 16:11:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:10 GMT