- From: Mira Slavova <mira@mmd4d.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:22:21 +0100
- To: public-mw4d@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4d9275350908100622q3e217594s58ea2097f79d6a8e@mail.gmail.com>
Dear All, Thank you for the interesting discussion this afternoon! Below are some comments I have on sections 1-5 of the existing draft. Please share your views! Cheers, Mira =================================================== Section 2, Paragraph 1-2: Even though the Digital Divide is a worthwhile concept, I am not sure if it would give us the best opening. It seems to have been replaced by concept such as "digital opportunity", "digital provide" and "transformational technology". i would suggest opening with something along these lines. Section 2, Paragraph 3: The reference by Leonard Waverman, Meloria Meschi and Melvyn Fuss of LBS is dated 2005 which I think is too old. It is also based on measure on the macroeconomic scale which is probably inappropriate. In terms of economic studies the ones by Jensen (India) and Muto (Uganda) which are included on the page of resources I think demonstrate the benefit of mobile technology. Another similar economic study is by Aker, a copy of which I am attaching. I am also attaching a copy of Jonathan Donner's recent article on the blurring of livelihoods and lives in the use of mobile technology. I'm not sure if he is somehow part of MW4D but I find his argument very convinsing. I think his perspective is relevant to the write-up of the roadmap and he even mentions the group explicitly. I think he might be a very interesting guest contributor to our discussions. Section 3: Even though the objectives are clearly stated I think this section needs to become a bit tighter. I would suggest reducing it to 2 paragraphs, one for each objective. The last sentence might serve well as an opening. Section 4: I think this section also needs a bit of thightening. I think it might be best if the content of the footnote in included in the sentence opening the bullet list of audiences. The order of the list also seems to be of significance. I suggest rewriting the list so that it consists of two bullet points. Something along the lines of "technology developers" and "international development community". Each point could list different actors from the surrent list who might be pursuing the respective objective of our roadmap. Thereby, the list of audiences will be congruent to the stated objectives of the document. That will build some continuity between sections 3 and 4. Section 5: The name of the section is a bit of a misnomer. Essentially it lists topics which are out of scope. I think this should be made clear in the title and I would suggest positioning the section immediately before the conclusion. -- Dr Mira Slavova ICT4D Consultant Mobile Market Design 4 Development mmd4d.org ++44 (0)7734 408829 -- Dr Mira Slavova ICT4D Consultant Mobile Market Design 4 Development mmd4d.org ++44 (0)7734 408829
Attachments
- application/pdf attachment: Donner_2009_INNOVATIONS.pdf
- application/pdf attachment: Niger_Aker_2008.pdf
Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 13:22:58 UTC