W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > February 2011

Re: slow down and organize

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:55:10 +0100
Cc: "Cosimo Streppone" <cosimo@opera.com>, "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8203894E-B70A-4C41-B824-8B630B7CDA68@bblfish.net>
To: Mischa Tuffield <mischa.tuffield@garlik.com>

On 24 Feb 2011, at 13:13, Mischa Tuffield wrote:

> Hi All, 
> 
> Following on from Nathan's original post to this thread. I too am having trouble following all the mail in circulation on this XG. I have been guilty of not being able to attend the first couple of telecons, and am finding it really hard to catch up with all of the talk/work going on. It would be nice if the issues were categorised in a way that would allow people with different skill sets to remain engaged and involved in the XG. 

yes, it should be quite possible for us to have things work in parallel. Not everyone needs to follow every topic in the same detail. The issues are already categorised by topic, though I am sure these can be improved, like everything else.

    http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/

One could open an issue to categorise the issues by priority, though assigning oneself an action that closes an issue is even better :-) Any member who wishes to can.

Not everyone needs to follow every thread,  except for me perhaps! (and I am unpaid) So I'd also like to ask when mails are written that they are as concise as possible, relevant to the thread in which they appear, as much as possible come with code, text, or test cases. It is really good to have contributions, but it should not be a full time job to follow the list :-) We should all be out there coding Federated Social Web examples, improving our browsers, and coming back here when we find there is a real issue that we should take notice of. 

It is also good that we have beginners at every level in the group, because this has to remain simple if it is to catch on. Simple is a lot more difficult than people think. It is a balancing act.

If any of you have an issue that you don't find listed you can open one. If a consensus to a solution comes up, you can write it up in the wiki. We have FAQs http://esw.w3.org/foaf+ssl/FAQ that can be improved. Don't hesitate to edit it and let us know. 

> 
> I have a strong understanding of RDF and FOAF, but I am not a security nor a crypto expert. I have had experience developing services using OpenID, OAuth, and very recently I have had to play around with SAML (joy!) - and as a developer I am not really impressed with the convoluted back and forwarding required by the aforementioned protocols. 
> 
> In terms of my interests in WebID, the concept of being to prove that a URI on the web is me, and the ability to transport additional information about me, is what I am most interested in, and it is this which I hope I can help out with. 
> 
> Slightly off topic, I am sure that you guys are aware that Microsoft have pulled their InfoCards initiative [1], and quoting the blog post, I too have similar concerns when it comes to the adoption of WebID. 
> 
> Quoting [1] : 
> 
> <!--
> 
> So with all this support and energy behind Information Cards, why arenít we on the path to ubiquitous adoption? While there are many reasons, Iíll highlight two, based upon my personal experiencesÖ
> 
> Not solving an immediate perceived problem: In my extensive experience talking with potential adopters, while many/most thought that CardSpace was a good idea, because they didnít see it solving a top-5 pain point that they were facing at that moment or providing immediate compelling value, they never actually allocated resources to do the adoption at their site.
> Not drop-dead simple to use: Users were often confused by their first encounter with CardSpace; many didnít succeed at the task at hand. Indeed, many saw it as something complicated getting in the way of what they were actually there to do.
> 
> --> 

Thanks for the pointer.

yes, my guess was too centralised or there was a fear of a hidden agenda among the public, and perhaps it was just a bit too far ahead of its time. The distributed Social Web should help drive something that Microsoft alone could not achieve. 

> 
> Hopefully I will be able to make next weeks telecon, and am looking forward to being of some help in the future. 

Great. Next telecon will be Monday 7th March. Perhaps by then we can have a good list of priorities worked out.

> 
> Cheers, 
> 
> Mischa
> 
> [1] http://self-issued.info/?p=458 
> 
> On 24 Feb 2011, at 10:20, Henry Story wrote:
> 
>> Hi Cosimo,
>> 
>>  I hope Nathan's overview was clear enough. The second video on my home page
>> http://bblfish.net/ shows what it looks like from the user perspective, but
>> we need to  working on improving the  implementations and the presentations. 
>> 
>> Of the two servers running there, the one creating the certificates is a simple Java based wiki. The other authenticating server is a php based server. Those are both prototypes, and may not be working. 
>> 
>> On 24 Feb 2011, at 01:45, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
>> 
>>> I had never heard of Clerezza before, and I tried to look up its
>>> documentation, but it feels like a giant beast. Do I need it
>>> to get WebID up and running?
>> 
>> No you don't need something as big as Clerezza. (though it's not that big: Reto got it to work on his Nokia cell phone I think) Clerezza is just a tool I am happy to work on being a Java person trying to move to Scala. And you are quite right the documentation is on the todo list there. :-)
>> 
>> There are a number of other implementations out there, listed at http://esw.w3.org/foaf+ssl
>> in perl, python, c, php, ... I hope Clerezza gives them some competition soon, so they improve their user friendliness :-)
>> 
>> What we need is to make sure we all interoperate, which is why I am really keen on getting a test suite out.
>> 
>> 
>>  Henry
>> 
>> 
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
>> 
> 
> ___________________________________
> Mischa Tuffield PhD
> Email: mischa.tuffield@garlik.com
> Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/
> Garlik Limited, 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW
> +44(0)845 652 2824  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2011 12:56:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:22 UTC