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

Re: Browser ID, WebID & URLs

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 07:50:54 +0100
Message-ID: <4E25294E.40105@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 7/19/11 3:56 AM, Ben Adida wrote:
> Right, the difference is that we're trying to start with the simplest
> layer, you're trying to build the distributed social network up front.

Come on now. So solution is to make a parallel system when you can 
bridge from the so called "simplest" to the so called "more complex". I 
am not buying your argument at all, sorry.

The AWWW is "deceptively simple" i.e., its value realm is shaped like a 
conventional pyramid, the more you challenge it the more pleasant 
surprises due to architectural dexterity. Sadly, since the Web 2.0 era 
we have a penchant for pushing "simply simple" solutions. These 
solutions basically take the form of inverted pyramids and lack 
architectural dexterity, and thus doesn't scale, and just burn people's 
time when they hit the inevitable exploitation cul-de-sacs.

You are making a Web 2.0 style argument, but you don't seem to realize 
that Web 2.0 isn't actually working at all. It doesn't save us time or 
make us more productive. It doesn't truly deliver on the power of AWWW 
etc.. Its actually a distraction, to put things bluntly. Also note, I 
don't regard VC inflated valuations and market capitalization as success 
indicators when talking about good technology architecture that serves a 
much bigger purpose as already exemplified by the WWW deliverable.



Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2011 06:51:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:25 UTC