W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-socialweb@w3.org > January 2010

Re: High-level social web guiding principles to SWxG

From: Kaliya <kaliya@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:48:46 -0800
Cc: public-xg-socialweb@w3.org
Message-id: <0E2057EF-8D09-4022-8F48-DD640C37B263@mac.com>
To: cperey@perey.com

On Jan 15, 2010, at 2:39 AM, Christine Perey wrote:

> On principle #5, compare these two statements A and B, the second  
> one using (to the best of my ability) the terms offered in this  
> table http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/SocialWebFrameworks#The_Terminology

I am just looking at this now.

I am a bit frustrated reading it. I am curious if you looked at the  
work of the identity community - where it defined clearly many of  
these terms.

You are using the same words to mean different things then us.  We as  
a community wrote a very clear Lexicon to talk amongst ourselves about  
the issues in 2004 as part of all the different identity efforts -  
OPenIDv1, LID, xri/i-names, sxip (these all became YADIs then OpenIDv2  
btw)  the SAML guys, Shiboleth (The InCommon/U.S. Higher eductation  
federation) Information Cards / Active Client folks.

So you can find the Lexicon here..
http://wiki.idcommons.net/lexicon
It also links to several other dictionaries/lexicons we drew on.   
There is an effort going on within our community now to sync these  
terms/definitions into the legal world.

I am strongly in favor of working to sync vocabulary with this body of  
work that is over 5 years old and is already in us across the  
community of technical experts working in this space. Your vocabulary  
that is different meaning there are words that mean different things  
or the same things labeled differently.

This will be very confusing to the market/community/internet etc.


So what you call a profile property - in our vocabulary is an  
"identity attribute"
http://wiki.idcommons.net/Identity_Attribute

I can't emphasize enough how much we as a community have worked on  
these issues/problems/use cases and standards for the past 5+ years.   
I really hope that we can find a way to better cross pollinate.  There  
is no need to re-invent/re-think...

I am actually not sure if ANY W3C folks interested in the social web  
came to IIW in November.  Our next one is in May - please please  
please let us all get a long and that venue is a GREAT place to do it  
cause anyone who comes can present.
http://www.interentidentityworkshop.com.

I fell like i should spend a whole 1/2 a day on the phone in video  
skype with the primary authors of this document and go through the  
terminology as well as the use cases & connecting you to people in our  
community.

I am around this week and happy to talk with folks about this in skype  
etc.

For those of you who missed it the principles you put forward are good  
& they resonate with the Purpose of identity commons put forward in  
2001....

http://wiki.idcommons.net/Purpose_And_Principles

The purpose of Identity Commons is to support, facilitate, and promote  
the creation of an open identity layer for the Internet, one that  
maximizes control, convenience, and privacy for the individual while  
encouraging the development of healthy, interoperable communities.

keep in mind that folks IN our community were the first users of the  
word "social web"....
http://journal.planetwork.net/article.php?lab=reed0704

Let me know how I can help make the connections.
-Kaliya



>
>
> A (original). You can communicate with connections no matter which  
> Social Network or Social Application you share.
>
> B (revised). The Social Web user may initiate and/or receive  
> communication across Social Connections which exist/are established  
> between multiple profiles which share a common Social Network or  
> Social Application.
>
> How this is different from what we have currently with Social  
> Network silos?
>
> -- 
> Christine
>
> Spime Wrangler
>
> cperey@perey.com
> mobile +41 79 436 68 69
> VoIP (from US) +1 (617) 848-8159
> Skype (from anywhere) Christine_Perey
>
>
> Döhler, Anita, VF-Group wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> We think a definition of high level principles which constitute the  
>> Social Web would be useful in the context of defining the framework  
>> for the Social Web and its concepts. Attached/below a proposal of  
>> so far 5 principles for dicsussion on the mailing list and/or at  
>> the next SWxG telcon.
>> High level principles
>> 1.	What you see depends on who you are.
>> 2.	Once defined, you can use your connections and relationships,  
>> across different Social Networks or Social Applications.
>> 3.	You can expose your content (User Generated Content) to  
>> different Social Networks or Social Applications, without the need  
>> to store the content in these networks/applications. 4.	You can  
>> define the access control on a per item basis, either per contact,  
>> or per group.
>> 5.	You can communicate with connections no matter which Social  
>> Network or Social Application you share.
>> Looking forward to hearing your comments w/r the need of agreeing  
>> on high level principles & their concrete content/wording,
>> Regards
>> Dan (A) & Anita
>
Received on Saturday, 16 January 2010 06:49:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:08 UTC