Re: init. ReSpec Notes & General Update

Hi David,

Thank you.

I apologise for what may be considered word-salad, it's more of a stream of
consciousness - in consideration of your question...

https://github.com/mediaprophet/init-draft-standards-wip  (github pages
render: https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/ ) has a
bunch of sort of 'template drafts' with some work done on it, but not
enough to be clearer - yet, imho.

IF these draft documents are better defined in a different format, let me
know (that's extended to the group).

i'm not sure if
https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/rights/UN/ (or work
on https://mediaprophet.github.io/init-draft-standards-wip/rights/UN/UDHR/
) is on the readme.md  There's a range of improvements to that work that
needs to be done and that i'd like to see happen (ie: related to the CML
docs);

I also think the ADP work needs to be advanced; as i'm strongly of the view
that domains are the best public anchor, not other peoples domains or
related URIs.  and; there's also issues about ensuring economic
consideration for the so called 'free workers' spending their lives doing
work on 'humanitarian ict' stuff, not to 'clip the ticket' in perpetuity on
others ability to exist, employ human rights of any kind; but rather, on a
basis that everyone deserves to be treated fairly... there was also
discussion at IGF about the advancement of solutions to address 'internet
shut-downs' which is something that i considered re: ADP (ie: defining a
domain / website, to be a humanitarian classified online resource - that
shouldn't be turned off at a time of conflict (International Human Rights
or IHL extensions, in-effect);

so, over the next few days i'm hoping to advance;
https://github.com/mediaprophet/xec-slp-rdf   which relates to
https://mediaprophet.github.io/semantic-tokens-xec/  and in-turn also,
experimentally models some of the underpinnings for ADP, Permissive Commons
and other parts; that i'm hoping to make progress on shortly.

Whereas the initial / earlier work on ADP focused moreover on a HTTP
document, i'm experimenting with IPFS - hoping to have a better
comprehension of these experimental works in about a week?  hopefully!

Noting - I'm not the best coder in the world..  given the absence otherwise
of help to code stuff up - get demos working cooperatively, work through
problems, then reduce down to specs needed (ie: w3c works) etc...  I'm
finding grok, gemini v2.5 pro, etc.  extraordinarily helpful.  yet, they do
produce 'for all of humanity' garbage, at times - platform focused outputs
- which then need to be refined...  but at least a bunch of it gets done,
in minutes...  kinda.  perhaps hours, anyhow.

two other thoughts;

1. ontology: it might make sense to create a unified ontological system
that can then be employed - rather than components.
https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg  serves as the basis for the vast
majority of ontology use in the public web today  - perhaps alongside
https://ogp.me/  - notwithstanding the vast footprint of ontological
infrastructure generally otherwise - that the vast majority of people
aren't at all aware of (web of data).  schemaorg has an engine - you can
see the files
https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/tree/main/data/releases/29.2  note
the CSV file - considerations about top-level ontology to address
'human-centric' needs more specifically, is considered important.  Indeed,
i think the consequence of ontology generally should likely give rise to
the development of a new far broader 'internet governance' group (akin to
ietf, w3c, etc) whilst those whose input is most needed (ie: liberal arts
eduction folk) - don't have the tools needed by them, yet.

SO, there's some philosophical design considerations associated with that -
here's some past work by a good soul;
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/

2. first principles & local 'semantics'; i am not presently sure how to
best address the need to have some sort of local, social, interface - like
RWW (
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1lpeoEFowRcq3VTAp5LH6cFN251O9g9iE )
or solid; that can run on personal computers. for now, i don't actually
care if it doesn't work when the person doesn't have their computer on - it
appears institutional efforts continually fail to - well - ends-up with
some sort of 'wallet', to define people - i think there's a different
approach - that those involved in policy, haven't really had the
opportunity to better consider.

So,

whilst the underlying plumbing isn't done - as i'm kinda trying to work on
now; and, we're along way down the track from the days of kazaa (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazaa  - fwiw; i tried to turn it into
something like RWW back in the day!  long story, an old one) some earlier
experiments looked at maybe how to use wireguard (ie: tailscale /
headscale) to create a form of 'social networking' based on RDF records,
etc.  intention being, to have a nominal hosted footprint requirement
(people need to have a domain name, that's important!  thereby also offers
a means to support their ability to provide a sub-domain, for their
children) ; and other ideas, were refactor beaker browser (
https://github.com/WebCivics/beaker-dev ) which doesn't have RDF support
presently; and, i'm otherwise not sure what or how to best define a MVP
(minimum viable product) for POC (proof of concept) to then instantiate
supports for 'social web' related functionality needed, long before hooking
'contexts' and various other parts into foundations,  required, for ML (ie:
llms, etc) apparatus.

Overall,

from my point of view, there was a path that was being developed up until
around 2018, which was terribly difficult until that time; but then, turned
into - covid passports / wallets...  whilst that vision is now clearly
articulated, the oxygen to explore and develop alternatives (as was
intended, and believed to be more secure in the end, more 'fit for
purpose') was somewhat extinguished or moreover, to some-degree, went
backwards.  Nowadays, the 'resonance' in relation work to produce software
to support human rights in relation to our 'mindware' is complicated by
LLMs, and experts bombarded by the enormity of uplift of interest; as
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2i9D24KQ5k spoke about - they 'get all the
calls from the crazy people', yet - how to they best discern the values of
whom they're deciding to spend time with vs. those otherwise ignored?
based upon their employer? their values?

so, i guess the underlying point is that there's not just 'one thing'
that's missing or different to what i'd like to see come about in the
future; rather, there's a sort of 'ecosystem of parts' that are required to
end-up with a different kind of 'information management' topology - so
called 'human centric', whilst moreover intended to be foundationally -
humanitarian ict - why else do people think, i'd have spent so much time
over so many years doin the so-called 'free' w3c work...  because, i wanted
the royalties?  meh.

anyhow.

That's not where they get their funds to operate / exist, either.

there's also a complex dichotomy; engendered in-effect, by the lack of
proper consideration earlier, and therefore lack of resources to do
better.  I'm both against 'sidelining' w3c efforts off into some other
quorum where 'free work' of others is sought to be commercially exploited,
without moral consideration.  (at a minimum).

yet also, w3c licensing and related considerations moreover relate to
specifications and related w3c apparatus - that somehow needs to make it
through the IG / WG process - if not simply otherwise a CG recommendation
(as may be done with documentation or ontology) and there's alot to do, to
first define the tools to enable that process to then come about (nb try
'info', then 'panel'
https://web.archive.org/web/20250111145109/https://worldwideweb.cern.ch/browser/
) - as was needed before https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkjyCPuTKPw became
possible...

(IMHO: it's hard to understand, why that sort of concept is still hard to
understand - or as is so told and/or said, by so many).

as noted earlier; i've set-up a zulip for web civics (my 'thing' kinda like
my 'w3c' effort, w3c was historically an unincorporated entity - in-effect,
it was timbl until recently - curated in a particular way, which some may
then surmise associates to who he is, as a person - a soul... ) ;  I do not
have resources, indeed, its quite troubling, a form of disability.  As
such, it's good that there is a chair for the group.  There's alot of
people in the world, interested in 'human centric' outcomes being brought
about via 'digital transformation'.  there's alot to do.  i noticed even in
schemaorg, it appeared - it lacked support for languages? or is that my
mistake?

maybe another zulip instance needs to be spun-up for the CG?  Historically
collaboration was done via IRC - but i'm not sure how many know how to use
that anymore.  I tried earlier with discord, but found the pseudonymity a
problem (raids).  In future, i hope there's simple tools - but, it would be
good to collaborate with others better - to get that done; and, in a way,
that isn't about someone owning / commercialising the foundations sought to
be built - for humanity...  to support human rights, in a manner, that it
seems - all others, have failed to achieve historically generally
otherwise.

#RealityCheckTech #Tech4Hope

Final Thoughts;

1. might be good if we tried to sort out a way to communicate with
one-another what our hopes, intended goals, perhaps (as a unifying force?)
- values (as fellow members of our human family) are?  then associate that
with what we're trying to achieve here; perhaps do so as 'lightning talks'
via teleconf - which then implies, something like zoom or moreover as
suggested, zulip / jitsi meet...  and, production of say, 5 slides or
something that can be posted to the CG works online to help clarify what
we're all doing here..  thereby also, seeking out others who might want to
get involved...

NB: perhaps also, this could be done in 2 phases (whilst coupled, seeking
to engender coherence);
a. the notes per above;
b. thereby informing, what becomes an initial presentation on what 'human
centric' means - to you. (therefore also, Human Centric AI - by extension,
like a prosthetic, of sorts; for yourself, your family members, friends and
in-turn social infrastructure (organisations, roles & responsibilities,
etc).

perhaps thereafter (b) becomes the first presentation, later informed by
(a).  but not necessarily..

2. administrative triage;  if the group is going to make progress, it needs
some people who are willing and able to curate activities, the creation and
management of to-do lists, etc.

I've certainly struggled with depression, as I think is a reasonable
response to environmental influences...   There appears to be strong
objection (and indeed also, disruption, disablement) to 'human centric'
efforts from some parts of the world; whilst, the term have become employed
in a prolific manner throughout many other parts, representing associated
populations that are far bigger in numbers - an extraordinary significant %
of our human family overall, here on earth.  Now, some claim - 'oh, but
where's the money. its not worth anything' - like - they're in some
simulation where their food and whatever they need in life appears, without
money.

their ability to care for their children - apparently entirely decoupled
from socioeconomics..

So - with these sorts of nonsense behaviours so prolifically promoted - in
english language (in particular?) I find it impossible to properly
understand how people could reasonably and intelligently think that by
providing infrastructure, digital transformation tooling - focused upon the
needs of human beings, that somehow, that means - they'll have no money..
i think the reality of what these people are actually saying, articulates a
form of much worse poverty...  and, i think there's wide-ranging questions
about whether and/or the relevance of w3c
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_governance  (
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_governance#/media/File%3AWho-Runs-the-Internet-graphic.png
) - at a time, so recent to the restructure of it - that those, who do have
institutional backing - should or could better articulate what they need to
better communicate the validity of these works generally, broadly and
otherwise; and then, perhaps we can have a better conversation about
addressing the challenges we need to overcome to better resource efforts,
for the betterment of humanity...  or, formalise a case that states and
shows that after careful and exhaustive efforts otherwise - w3c is not the
place, somewhere else is needed...

probably not associated so much with the US(/UK) i'd imagine..  which, i
think - would be a shame.. at IGF one speaker responded to a question I
asked (from memory) with a resolute statement about how their region uses
ISO standards...   I know others are evolving works via various IEEE
realms...

The world, at present, is not very peaceful. I think that's due to a lack
of infrastructure to better support our means to understand one-another...
to better care for, each-others souls..  our humanity. and in-turn, our
knowledge and our means to share it with one-another, on fair-terms.
particularly, when not otherwise engaged in sleep or recreation; and
without, foolishly defining human beings as a class of consumable natural
resources for entities - that are of the world of man, not that of earth.
 anyhow. philosophy.  I guess my view is that if the environment becomes
too sterile of life, then we build a domain solely focused upon
Owl:thing(s).

There's certainly not alot of support ontologically atm, otherwise...  Yet,
I lament the means to feel the need to do so, on a public list.  as becomes
historical artefact, etc.

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/explore-the-collection/explore-by-time-period/georgians/1833-abolition-of-slavery-act-and-compensation-claims/

IMHO: it's not beyond the realm of 'possible futures' that such a thing
might not be necessary in the future (re: "digital slavery" and/or
similar); yet, if that were the case, then how can efforts be made to
deliver outcomes where people get paid fairly for useful work (not in
perpetuity) as a constituency of resources used to produce some useful
outcome (ie: "obligation cost") that then gets paid-down (ie: not unlike
internet advertising models, CPMs, CPCs, etc) until the 'obligation cost'
has been extinguished (fully paid) thereby also; ensuring considerations,
socioeconomically, about the merits (responsibility, liability, etc) of a
person, based upon what they do.  there's so many complex nuances, far
beyond the realm of the fundamentals - afaik (as far as i know) physics for
'free work' doesn't actually exist - at a bare minimum, there's time and
energy (not sure how distinct they really are...).  so, if we want to
advance from this 'information age' to a 'knowledge age', imho, we've got
some work cut-out for us, to get some of the fundamentals done - to have a
basis, that works - in relation to physics - in / on - an honourable basis.

Jobs - talking about NeXT & 'interpersonal computing'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w55KZfj0DqU

christmas day 2016 i made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9vROTibKiE (its
long, but maybe helpful) to help get speakers for
https://web.archive.org/web/20221015083722/https://2017.trustfactory.org/

but that all kinda ended-up turning into
https://web.archive.org/web/20150908003750/https://id2020.org/  - which I
had some involvement in, lamenting my lack of clarity (somewhat engineered)
about the broader implications of it..  I only focused on the web-payments
/ credentials work, as it was being illustrated to me via that CG.  An
important lesson...  but also; illustrative of the importance to seek to
ensure good cooperative / collaborative dynamics are somehow improved via
w3c; as, it could otherwise be argued some 'unintended outcomes'(?) have
left us with - so much work to do still, due to the historical lack of it.
notwithstanding the fact, that 'best efforts' is all that can ever be
sought of anyone, particularly those doing work - that's so often not well
understood, and merely only otherwise contextualised in relation to whether
or how much, they're being paid (the implications as considered via the
lens of 'their wallet')...

I'll follow-up off-list, but hope this helps.

best.

Tim.h.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ubiquitous/


On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 at 14:30, David Dennison SEO Expert <
david@daviddennison.com> wrote:

> Love what you've done here brotha. How can I help?
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 10:40 PM Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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/
>>
>>