W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-council@w3.org > August 2015

Re: to recycle old and inactive CG (Community I/O) or to propose new one (Collaborative Economy)?

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:06:53 -0400
Message-ID: <55D6092D.8000901@w3.org>
To: "Bassetti, Ann" <ann.bassetti@boeing.com>, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Daniel Harris <daniel@kendra.org.uk>
CC: "public-council@w3.org" <public-council@w3.org>, "public-social-interest@w3.org" <public-social-interest@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>

On 08/20/2015 12:30 PM, Bassetti, Ann wrote:
> Sounds very interesting, elf. Lynn Foster also explained some of this to me awhile ago -- fascinating explorations!
> I suggest using a name that is most recognizable by the community you want to attract. And also for communicating the concept(s) publicly.  For me, with no background, "economy" sounds more explicit than I/O for what I understand you are trying to get at. I/O to me implies computer system level actions.
> Sandro, Harry, Wendy -- from a W3C point-of-view, would elf start a new group or can he re-name his old group?

I believe the answer is 'start a new group' would be far by easiest. I
do not know if we can re-label old groups, and I doubt we can without
systeam work that is unlikely to happen. Elf can ask System Team
directly by emailing sysreq@w3.org.


>   -- Ann
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ [mailto:perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 9:18 AM
>> To: Daniel Harris
>> Cc: public-council@w3.org; harry Halpin; public-social-interest@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: to recycle old and inactive CG (Community I/O) or to propose
>> new one (Collaborative Economy)?
>> Hi Daniel,
>> On 08/20/2015 04:17 PM, Daniel Harris wrote:
>>>> Since than, many new open source project emerged working in field of
>>>> Collaborative Economy and I would like to offer a venue to various
>>>> people who work on them to give more focus to make them gradually
>>>> more interoperable.
>>>> I consider proposing Collaborative Economy Community Group, following
>>>> naming used on social media. (for example on twitter
>>>> https://twitter.com/hashtag/CollaborativeEconomy) and using #collecon
>>>> IRC channel and collecon-public@w3.org mailing list.
>>> I must admit I prefer "Collaboration IO" to "Collaborative Economy". Use
>> #collabio?
>>> But, I guess, if you are trying to appeal to those who are conversant with
>> "Collaborative Economy" (a la OuiShare, Shareable...) then perhaps the more
>> well used/recognised words are more appropriate and better to get
>> engagement and adoption.
>> I find myself making big mistake in setting way to broad context in
>> Community I/O, Collaboration I/O still seems super generic and in many ways
>> I/O can create more confusion than clarification.
>> I want to emphasize the Economy part, and work around established terms
>> like Sharing Economy, Collaborative Consumption and in last years more
>> balanced Collaborative Economy. I would even include in description couple
>> of more specific tags: #carpooling #ridesharing #mealsharing #foodcoops
>> #coworking #hospitality #coliving #volunteering #swapping #skillsharing
>> #coproduction #commons etc.
>> I would also like to make it clear that it doesn't exclude commerce, but at the
>> same time puts clearly in scope economic interactions based on sharing,
>> collaboration, prosumption, volunteering etc.
>> Also staying agnostic towards various possible forms of accounting, those
>> already existing: barter, monatary purchase, reputation based grant,
>> donation/gift, merit/karma etc. as well as those now unknown but which will
>> appear in the future.
>> Maybe starting with writing a clear charter draft, together with other
>> interested people would make sense here? I would also refer to some
>> particular candidate technologies, for example:
>> * http://goodrelations-vocabulary.org
>> * http://schema.org/Offer, http://schema.org/Demand,
>> http://schema.org/Service
>> * http://microformats.org/wiki/h-listing
>> * https://web-payments.org/specs/
>> I think this would allow better decision for a possible venue...
>> Cheers!
Received on Thursday, 20 August 2015 17:07:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:16:39 UTC