Re: RE : Re: Federation protocols

Dnia środa, 12 czerwca 2013 o 10:21:58 Goix Laurent Walter napisał(a):
> The more i follow this thread the more i see 2 teams wih different
> priorities in this group: one focused on discussing all the current
> projects promoting parallel initiatives that focus on specific
> topics/issues with little care about interop between them for now, the
> other wanting to select one project as reference for interop and true
> deployments and build on/evolve it progressively.
> 
> Should we formalize these 2 teams to start some concrete collaborations?

Short answer:
No.

Long answer:
I thought this is the *federated* social web working group of the W3C, not the 
"oh look at my shiny new social network" popularity contest. Federation 
implies interoperability.

If we cannot agree to try to get different libre social networks to federate 
and interoperate together to some extent, might I ask what is the point of 
this group at all?

I'm sure that during the days of yore, when HTTP was discussed, everybody and 
their dog had their favourite little functionality that did not go into HTTP. 
In the end however they all finally settled on HTTP. I have no idea nor 
interest if HTTP can be called the "lowest common denominator" of different 
approaches proposed back then. Why? Because it *worked*. It was *good enough*.

"Done is better than perfect."

Everybody and their dog now seems to have their favourite social networking 
flavour. Will we find a way to bring interoperability to "federated" social 
web, or are we doomed to a walled-gardens-based Internet from now on?

-- 
Pozdrawiam
Michał "rysiek" Woźniak

Fundacja Wolnego i Otwartego Oprogramowania