- From: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:35:01 +0200
- To: Daniel Harris <daniel@kendra.org.uk>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Harris <daniel@kendra.org.uk> wrote: > I feel our model has to cater for multiple namespaces for contacts. Can it? Can we create an meta namespaces-for-contacts wrapper? yes, this is exactly what i mean when i say one namespace. i mean one 'meta wrapper'. useraddress.net aims to be a search tool that can support that meta wrapper. it supports webfinger/OStatus as well as facebook, twitter, diaspora, friendica, and i want it to support xmpp/buddycloud too. > And do it quickly and quietly before someone else creates an incompatible meta namespaces-for-contacts wrapper? And maybe that won't matter actually as a wrapper should be able to wrap another wrapper, right? correct, once we start wrapping, the more people work on wrappers the better. we'll wrap it all into one big ball where more and more things get included with each wrap. :) i mean, there should not be one wrapper competing with any other wrapper, all wrappers should include each other wrapper and vice versa. then we get one network, and we all win. As we already said on the phone, i personally will be working on this, and will report my results and contributions to this mailing list. I don't need any money myself, but i'll be more than happy to coordinate my efforts with what other people are working on so we get more momentum on this topic, with multiple full-time and/or part-time people working specifically on tackling the fedsocweb problem in a sort of a 'team work' way if you like. Maybe even splitting it up like "you do this, you do that, we reconvene and discuss the progress in six weeks". Indeed SWAT0 was a good start for establishing such a coordination, but we may need some new Plan now. That way i'm sure we can make some good progress over the coming months.
Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 15:35:28 UTC