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

webid trust model, one or multiple?

From: peter williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 11:37:27 -0700
Message-ID: <SNT143-ds15B03694C3A95C272D4050929C0@phx.gbl>
To: "'WebID Incubator Group WG'" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Is there one webid trust model, or are there to be multiple - because the IX
about standardizing "a framework" for trust overlays? If it's a framework, I
see value in using logical description "enabling" trust metrics,
generically. These can drive link chain discovery, as usual. It's criteria
based search.

 

Im trying to decide where to spend my time in the next three months. There
is no point me being involved in something I don't believe will ever work
(standardize a single trust metric). I might as well get out the way, if
this is the group's mission.

 

If it helps motivate the decision, a realworld user story of handling
macro-trust issues - at national scale - may be applicable. 

 

There is just no way I can impose a trust metric on my very local,
de-centralized customer base - as they network using the social web. They
will quickly slap me down for even trying, let alone agree with any given
proposal. They SEEK local variance in trust etc. It's what distinguishes
their value, in the subtle "business social networking" scene found in
selling real-estate to migratory populations, or as folks change lifestyle
with age, income brackets, etc. 

 

The that scene, one sells trust in "gated communities" to one person, and
one sells "iron bars on the windows" to another. Some communities measure
trust in the absence of broken cars in the street, or absence of side-walks
in country streets; and the realtor will project that value system. Trust,
safety, confidence, and assurance are all variant terms, that get bandied
around.

 

Others communities have more divisive trust measures, often obliquely stated
or enforced. Somehow the independent realtor as trusted agent has to mediate
even these issues (which obviously requires  ALOT of social finesse).
Received on Sunday, 1 May 2011 18:37:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 1 May 2011 18:37:58 GMT