init. ReSpec Notes & General Update

Hi All,

I’ve spent some time - trying to lay-out some of the ideas I've had about
Human Centric AI related tooling, that could be advanced via w3c - if
considered to have merit, and if the resources can be found to do so.  If
anyone is interested in collaborating on any of these projects, let me know.

NOTE: I've often got older works on efforts relating to these topics; but,
elected to generate the documents more rapidly, by providing fairly simple
descriptions into grok which then helped to quickly generate respec files.
There's still alot of problems with these files and the format of the text;
it is hoped, that others can get a 'sense' of what i'm generally trying to
point at, and that rather than finishing the job (better) first - it was -
'better' to provide an update about it for you.

SOME of the documents have been updated more than others (ie: by hand,
etc.).

Git Repo:
https://github.com/mediaprophet/init-draft-standards-wip/tree/main/rights

*Agent Discovery Protocol (“ADP”): *
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/ADP/)
notes: https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/ADP/README.md

To provide a public means for associating basic (public) information about
the holder of a domain or subdomain.

This is intended to be interoperable with both WebID and ‘Socially Aware
Online Data Storage’ services (ie: solid).  With Semantic Web, URIs have
locations; if the location is based upon a ‘POD’ address (ie:
hostProvider.tld/\[mypod\]/) then if a user moves to a different location,
all the links break.  By using a domain name that the person owns (or is a
sub-domain provided by family / parents); this problem is resolved.  It
also means that rather than looking-up someone's bitcoin (or eCash, etc.)
address, it should be able to be discovered simply via their domain
name.  Similarly also, their CURRENT SociallyAwareCloudStorage  (
https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html ) location (ie: mydata or
solid, etc).

Other use-cases considered included;

- Means to define different categories of web-sites (domains) to address
‘internet shutdown’ issues.
- Means to associate metadata of content from a source location to the type
of agent (ie: content was from [chatgpt.com](http://chatgpt.com) [grok.com](
http://grok.com) or whatever)
- Means to provide discoverability of underlying ‘web of data’ services
(ie: MCP address, which didn’t exist when i first started on it \- noting
also, things like sparql end-points, etc).

It is believed that part of this needs to be done via IETF;

*ADP Internet Draft WIP:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/ADP/rfc.txt

*Agreements: *
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/agreements/
notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/agreements/README.md
To provide a means for people to form agreements (inc. support for
constituencies) with one-another.

In social-web related implementations (ie: when people have their own
domains, etc.) then the means for people to form agreements with
one-another, rather than just ‘accepting terms of service’ with a checkbox
(mandates?) \- requires a defined approach. Part of this approach assumes
widely supported instruments (such as human rights instruments) are
supported via RDF; which would also then enable personal (private) agents
to evaluate whether engagement between agents is in compliance with those
agreements or not.

Also, relationships change overtime; it may lead to access to a person's
home, car, private info, shared info (commons in relation to the
relationship itself); those sorts of terms need agreements - that’s the
point of agreements…  old concept, not supported easily via ‘digital
transformation’ yet.

*Context Markup Language: *
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/cml/
notes: https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/cml/README.md


To define the intended, specified meaning of otherwise unstructured text;
and,
*Context Markup Language Document:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/CMLD/
notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/CMLD/README.md to
support CML in an external document (eg; similar to a css or js file)

The concept is that there’s a mark-up means to provide a literal / logical
programming / specific  meaning \- for a particular term used in
unstructured text.  It could also be used to provide context in terms of
metadata.

*DID-GIT:* https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/did-git/
notes;
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/did-git/README.md
 to define a DID for GIT. (not github)

Most machines can support git.  The protocol has a bunch of good
functionality to support provenance, etc.

*Permissive Commons:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/PC/
notes: https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/PC/README.md
To update ‘open-data’ and/or ‘commons’ supports to incorporate use of
non-http-uris for linked-data (rdf) resources.

Permissive commons \- is an advancement of ‘linked-open-data’ whereby the
inability to maintain resources online is sought to be addressed via DLTs.
This was one of the most critical reasons why Decentralised IDentifiers,
was thought to be a great idea (\~2014).

*Semantic Bookmarks: *
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/SemBookmarks/
notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/SemBookmarks/README.md
To update ‘web-bookmarks’ to support semantic (RDF) information. May also
consider how to decentralise archival support for internet (ie; web)
resources.

Bookmarks are old and simple. They could be updated to incorporate a schema
file, which improves the means to then query local libraries.

*Human Centric Biometrics:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/biometrics/
notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/Biometrics/README.md
To define how people can own their own biometrics, whilst enabling means to
ensure manageable and permissive use of online systems in relation to the
use of them.

People should own their own biometrics as an extension of themselves.

Ontology related notes;

- *Human-Centric AI Ontology: *
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/HCAIO/ (notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/agreements/README.md):
to provide top-level ontology for human beings and Human Centric AI.
- *Description Of an Agent:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DOA/ (notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DOA/README.md ): To
provide ontology for ‘agents’.
- *Description of an Entity:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DOE/ (notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DOE/README.md ); to
provide ontology for ‘entities’
- *Ontology for Multi-Entity Rights:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/rights/ (notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/rights/README.md ):
to define a rights-framework that better reflects considerations in
relation to electronic informational resources and related semantics.
- *Human Centric Digital Birth Records:*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DigitalBirthRecord/
 (notes:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/DigitalBirthRecord/README.md):
to provide a foundation for ‘Human Centric AI / Web / Internet’ related
systems, ensuring natural persons (rather than registered legal
personalities) have digital agency.

NOTE:  The top-level predicate for 'OWL' is 'thing' (or nothing).  I argue
that's suitable for 'things' but not souls. not natural people.

I suspect these works would or could end-up being remodelled into - a very
different - far improved - structure.  I've just not had time to do it
enough, to better illustrate considerations - yet. ADP, from a W3C
perspective, is also most likely - mostly about defining the ontology for
it. There's a range of complicated strategic considerations and
implications.  The works do not yet declaratively state semantic version
control, which I think is likely important; as to ensure mitigation against
any future challenges where intended purposes may be influenced by
institutional actors, if / once, it makes progress.

Historically, alot of these functions were supported - somewhat (context,
in relation to time, etc) by FOAF - ie: FOAF:AGENT:SOFTWARE  (
https://web.archive.org/web/20070829104416/http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#term_Agent
) or otherwise... (as was illustrated to some folk sometime ago, from
memory - before the 'agentic' stuff became so popular)...

FOAF: https://web.archive.org/web/20070829104416/http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
is widely supported, and was - foundational...  Yet, it's also now - fairly
old and the rest of the 'web of data' has developed alot since.

Part of the challenge, in my mind, is how to then define support for
ontology on non-http-uris (ie: IPFS, GIT, etc).

I had a bit of a look at https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg engine -
thinking maybe, update it? refactor the ontology?
https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/tree/main/data/releases/29.2  noting
- atm, it appears to be in english not in all languages...  which, (as is
implied) leads to complications - that will take more time (resources) to
better consider..  thereby also, impacting the structure of any respec docs
done (as noted) to provide some guidance / support & related illustrations,
in the meantime.
NOTE:  SchemaOrg has some heritage with SEO and importantly also, finding
places (ie: google maps, etc); therefore, types like 'doctor' = a place,
not a person - https://schema.org/Physician

there are alot of ontologies - https://lod-cloud.net/ yet also, some of the
ontological interfaces (ie: wikidata) does not have a comparable amount of
information than the related plain-text source (ie: wikipedia item, paired
with wikidata item); there's also some 'factoring' implications by seeking
to put Semantic Web (HTTP) ontologies on non-http-uris. I've made some
notes in the above noted (respec formatted) docs.

*SPARQL-MM*:
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/Sparql-mm/
Sparql-MM (multimedia fragments) was originally done
https://github.com/tkurz/sparql-mm  however i couldn't find a respec
document outlining it.  I believe (when combined with Sparql-fed) this
offers ways to support discovery of multimedia objects / fragments, in a
decentralised way.

*Universal Language Encoding Methodology (ULEM):*
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/ulem/
There's alot of languages that are not presently supported by Unicode.  a
quickly produced description of the scale of the problem is described;
https://github.com/mediaprophet/init-draft-standards-wip/blob/main/ulem/Digital_Support_for_Mother_Tongue_Languages.md

Whilst there's alot of talk about there not being any more 'data' for LLMs
/ machine-Learning, its difficult to understand how this makes sense - if -
languages remain unsupported.

GENERAL NOTES & CONSIDERATIONS:

I've also put some 'issues' :
https://github.com/mediaprophet/init-draft-standards-wip/issues

IF these 'respec' projects are sought to be further developed by other
members of this w3c human centric ai cg - then, it is probably best to
figure out a better location for the files / project files, than where
they've been put presently.  I have historically set-up a Human Centric AI
xyz 'org' https://github.com/orgs/HumanCentricAI-xyz/repositories  when the
hope was to advance works with ISOC & W3C - which didn't work out...

There's others that I intend to produce about 'Ai Safety Protocols', which
some of the above could be categorised as - but are still incomplete.
There was some work on a 'agent labelling' project, which was before MCP
and as is otherwise in-part addressed by the ADP concept; and, there's
other decentralisation infrastructure to support trust between one-another,
such as local content checks that can provide 'green ticks', alongside
potential use-cases around police-checks and other factors that relate to
'social web' systems, where people might want features to better trust
one-another - in an environment, where people can have relationships that
are not otherwise mediated by traditional web 2.0 platforms.

Another factor / consideration recently; is how to more clearly describe
the earlier 'sense' work, to better illustrate how to create an 'inforg' (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inforg ) container format, that enables
export / migration between platforms, of 'their information'.  As noted in
that work, the current considerations / tests / experiments, look at how to
employ HDF5 (h5) files to achieve this outcome; whilst, i'm also aware of
newer works that appear to be using MP4 files in interesting ways..  Again
- I consider these works to have many non-trivial implications,
considerations and design requirements.  (as to ensure human rights
supporting focus is maintained / realised). Yet, it became obvious to me
during IGF that there's alot of people who may only be defined 'on the
internet' via some sort of 'wallet' related identifier, without the means
to maintain agency over anything else.  there's alot of use-cases around
this, including people who are serving time in prison  (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRGhrYmUjU4 ) and, whilst i'm not sure
their design of a 'prison wallet', i found the answer to my search for the
terms meaning - kinda funny (i assume, that's not what they're intending to
support); kinda like the psychiatric meaning of DID...  which, also relates
the consequences upon people who've suffered serious human rights harms...

Finally: When my time participating with W3C (via Henry Story initially,
then others... 🙏🕊️) started; the work was built around the use of WebID,
RWW & therefore also, advancements (ie: web-payments, credentials /
verifiable claims, dids, etc); over that time, MyData (
https://github.com/okffi/mydata/blob/gh-pages/en/pdf/MyData-nordic-model.pdf
) evolved, alongside other initiatives.  In my earlier designs, the
intended outcome was to use a fabric of identifiers (webid-tls, webid-rsa,
webid-oidc, plus other aspects) that then ended-up being curated via
systems that sought to end-ify (that is, clarify cryptographically) the
series of 'agents' involved in sessions...  thereby helping to ensure
computational awareness about say, where a person is (are they both in
Australia - As well as using their credit card in Asia? or does logic
suggest, they can't be in two places at once?) - since then, the 'wallet'
methods have developed (it was defined as a threat, much earlier on); and,
i don't know how these systems achieve a similar outcome.  This also has
implications about solid - perhaps... I'm not sure yet.  Whilst, earlier
works on RWW could be rebuilt and/or sought to be harmonised with other
approaches (ie: those advanced by MyData); yet also, the importance of
namespace (RDF, in-effect); is often not supported by other forms of
implementations, and the works on 'permissive commons' (non-http-uri RDF)
isn't advanced, afaik; yet, i've not done enough recent work on 'DID's' to
know better - as, well - in-part, i disagreed with the notion that the term
should mean 'decentralised IDENTITY' rather than 'Decentralised
'Identifiers'', which imho, has important semantic differentiations -
notwithstanding, the right for people to have different religions, beliefs,
etc...  Just that also, w3c should be about interoperability (ability for
people to use different systems, built with different ideologies; (ie:
windows, linux, osx; or different browsers, etc.).   Overall:  I intend to
update the repos with other constituents as / when; both, I get time & am
able to do so.

My initial works were from the late 90s early 2000s, which changed alot
when I got stuck into it with greater gusto in 2010...  it's now 2025. alot
has developed over that time (not so much foaf) so, whilst somewhat
exhausted and bothered alot by the lack of support for human rights
protections (enabled for persons, in courts of law, via digital evidence,
etc.  alongside other broader issues, threats, etc.); thinking, when some
of these problems first emerged, the children then, are now
adults... problems are still left unaddressed..

There is both a cause to look at employing tooling produced, yet perhaps
not advanced as much as was hoped by early contributors, to achieve
particular use-case related outcomes (ie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhwAiTOFPrc ); vs. reconsidering 'the
stack' from a modern point of view, which may both, take more time,
introduce additional risks / postponements; influenced also both by, the
means to more quickly generate outcomes due to newer technologies, whilst
making it more difficult to get meaningful consensus based advancements,
due to the increased volume and diversity of contributor areas of expertise
- (certainly not bad, but also not fast); and, the continuing issue that
there's a lack of resources available for what i'd call - human centric -
works...  (ie: not platform / consumer based 'monthly rents', etc.).

*PERSONALLY*:
I have to focus on finding a path to address my personal circumstances.  I
am hopeful this will result in a solution that will lead to means to better
resource these and related works - for humanity, etc... Which involves
seeking to discover the best jurisdiction to do the work (where its able to
be better supported), then find the resources to do so better; Nonetheless,
I have a limited amount of time and have medical issues impacting my
ability to concentrate (neuralgia & untreated ADD/ADHD (apparently - the
cure is 'move to queensland', although that's a clinically disputed notion
- i'm not able to do much about, notwithstanding the issues of pain - that
has improved - but is still a problem.  underlying problem likely poverty &
lack of comprehension generally, about how 'web standards' and related
works are done & Whom by;although, i suspect doctors aren't happy about
'vaccine passports' and/or were?  i don't know - i didn't like them -
didn't support it. Particularly in relation to the implications associated
with children.  didn't think it was the best way to get critical mass on an
alternative to google / microsoft / facebook credentials. As noted, when we
were trying to charter the work in 2015;
https://soundcloud.com/ubiquitous-au/2nd-june-2015-credentialscgtelecon-medical-
So, i'm guessing part of my problem is that the vast majority of medical
workers, continued work throughout the time?  I don't know.  maybe they
think it was my fault, or maybe i'm confused - in-fact, i am, just don't fully
know how.)

In-order to address these challenges, I need to sort out my socioeconomic
situation before being able to do anything about it.

I thought it was important to provide some info that could contribute
towards former works illustrated on the lists earlier, as to hopefully -
help the group, find some direction and/or work, projects to advance...  As
i've been doing it, i've found that often people go about putting some of
this into a LLM (ie: chatgpt, etc) yet, i note that the context of these
systems doesn't take into consideration the constituencies in full, nor the
underpinnings (ie: works like RWW, Credentials (verifiable claims), etc.
which all form constituencies to broader ecosystems that in my opinion
(purpose) can operate very differently to the present-day pursuits to solve
all the problems via 'digital identity wallets' (probably a major reason
why i'm having trouble getting medical care, etc...  'adversaries'!! ),
and/or similar (seemingly thin-client?) ..

IGF was held recently, i participated online as best i could - NOTES RE: ME,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erTe4GrzOlE&t=3221s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQvUxa4gtw&t=3886s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDoqVBMbUDU&t=2523s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNQvUxa4gtw&t=2164s

It appears the ADP related work has been advanced from the time i presented
it at IETF119 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDH5eaIF_zc&t=2024s ) to
address 'law of war' (International Human Rights Law / IHL) issues, which i
think is a good thing.  Although, I lament that we've not been able to do
more via this CG...

FWIW:  I've also seen alot of 'empathy as a service' and related 'mental
health' bots (LLM targets, etc); I've also seen these tools being applied
towards efforts to understand 'consciousness', and related factors. The
application of these efforts (commercially) to target children particularly
worries me, whilst i suspect there's probably benefits if applied to
persons in aged-care facilities suffering from degenerative disorders such
as alzheimer.

As is otherwise somewhat implicit, the architectural considerations made by
the constituencies noted above; are different to platform-centric or
organisational-centric (ie: gov or platform+gov, or
platform+gov+gov+gov+data-sales, etc) modalities, which thereby also seek
to address various 'context' issues, in a human-centric manner.

I hope this helps!

Implicitly - people are welcome to fork the repos for w3c works...  Yet
presently, I think they need alot more work before being considered by the
group to change the publication status to anything more meaningful.

*Broadly otherwise;*

I've also continued to update the Human Centric AI - Google Alerts - sheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BdFy5m-J5Lj5LnYxDY7d06MtKaUw3G3UqaLWKnuwptk/edit?gid=0#gid=0

noting, that the publicDocuments tab - is incomplete.

Inrupt, co-founded by TimBL  ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkjyCPuTKPw
) has some new content from London Tech Week
https://www.inrupt.com/blog/insights-from-london-tech-week-2025
https://technologymagazine.com/news/ltw-2025-interview-with-inrupt-co-founder-ceo-john-bruce

Personally, I don't understand how solid turned into a wallet, yet, I
suspect there's more 'under the hood', as is generally the case otherwise
with the body of work known as 'w3c'...

I'm currently working on how to 'blockchain' an economic model to support
human-centric works, contributions, civics, etc.  the notion is premised
upon the idea of people being paid fairly for useful work, but not in
perpetuity.  therein - production requires the employment of resources,
including the time and effort of people; and, it's important to address
'digital slavery' and/or related exploitative underlying problems, that
disaffect both our ability to advance humanitarian ict works; and, our
ability to better address cyber-security related issues and semantic
challenges.  As this work is presently being modelled using Bitcoin-ABC as
a foundation, I'm thinking it's not really a w3c project - at least, not
until there's some sort of derivatives that become more useful for that
purpose.  Therein, part of what I'm looking to achieve is to use RDF in
relation to SLP (old spec:
https://github.com/simpleledger/slp-specifications ); which basically
means, RDF (inc. SHACL, etc.) on IPFS or similar, that then gets baked into
tokens.

If anyone is interested in helping out - noting - its difficult to track
contributions / provide 'obligation / obligation free' semantics until it's
done;

Finally also,

designs are (have always been) intended to support a future solution for
people to own the prosthetic extension of their 'mindware', akin to a
prosthetic eye (i have one, had one since i was ~1 Y/old); its rent free!!
owned by me, not some platform - etc.

Yet, i'm *unwilling *to do more meaningful work on that, until there's a
safe place to do so.  IMHO: there have already been attempts to get 'my
free work' (so they call it, although, unsure of the physics
explanation for the therum?) to then deploy in relation to BCI or other
applications that appears to seek to produce some proprietary approach that
can be owned and commercialised (not necessarily via a 'consent' model) by
those who've seemingly employed sophisticated tactics to do so.  I can't
protect against that in poverty and without resources.  it needs a safe
place to be done - in full - properly, with integrity, moral purpose &
outcomes, that materially act - to support human rights, not pervert,
undermine, deprecate or via 'digital transformation' act to effectively -
define human beings, as another class of consumable natural resource for
mining, exploitation, etc.  Its befuddling to consider the implications of
the barriers brought about, given, such 'competitors' are both human and
often also, parents and/or grandparents.

In the meantime, I'm more focused on seeking to illustrate the many social
use-cases, such as ensuring support for homeless people and otherwise
addressing fundamental social needs that have not otherwise been better
addressed.  The hope is that this will in-turn help to illustrate the
flaws, otherwise set aside, that are persistent and costly.This is then
coupled with my continued efforts to help people better understand
underlying concepts, such as 'what is semantic web', or 'ontology' or
various other factors;  The environment I'm using is zulip, which then
supports video conferencing (zoom like functionality) via zulip natively
(and freely).

The links to the apps are,

Download Zulip Apps: https://zulip.com/apps/

Download Jitsi Apps https://jitsi.org/downloads/  (not needed for desktop
use)

A set-up could be produced for the W3C Human Centric AI CG (or for whatever
other purpose); and, the tools are otherwise used by IETF amongst others.

Yet, as noted earlier, i've got one running for 'Web Civics'
Invite Link: https://webcivics.zulipchat.com/join/vouhrkyb73p5jrrcgqjctqdu/
(indeed, i've experimentally sent this email to that environment also...)

Which is where you can find me if you want to chat (other than linkedin or
via email, etc.)

Best regards,


Timothy Charles Holborn.
Media Prophet | Web Civics | Trust Factory | Webizen
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ubiquitous/