R: R: R: Social API: Scope

+1. This was the approach used by ostatus via webfinger that could express usr "profile" in a number of alternative ways for the client entity to choose from (I suppose owen will agree on this as well). And probably some de-facto format will emerge at some point that will at some point be shared by a number of implementations/deployments for interop. The year after another format could emerge and take it all.
What I would thus foresee as valuable for this activity within W3c would be in that sense to list some "valid candidates" for each of these "formats" or uri schemes (at least as of now) to somehow provide an initial input to developers. But this may be more a task for the IG group (cc'ed, currently its charter mentions "social vocabularies" in general but the text focuses on activities mainly so I am not sure to which extent this will be addressed there)

walter

> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Erik Wilde [mailto:dret@berkeley.edu]
> Inviato: venerdì 1 agosto 2014 18.36
> A: Goix Laurent Walter; Harry Halpin; public-socialweb@w3.org
> Oggetto: Re: R: R: Social API: Scope
>
> hello walter.
>
> On 2014-08-01, 9:25 , Goix Laurent Walter wrote:
> > [walter] in general if we want (i am speaking in broad terms, maybe beyond
> the scope of w3c in this field) to have interoperable - federated - social
> networks in the future we should keep in mind that they are likely to be
> managing an identity and a list of relationships of ours. This means that they
> will have to offer interoperable ways of addressing users, and whilst
> technically not mandatory, access their profile and/or list of relationships
> (one could always say that this information stays private and/or
> implementation-/service provider-specific).
> > We all know there are already many ways of expressing this information
> (profile/relationships), and many URI schemes to address users, and it
> probably would make less sense to define yet others.
> > My question is thus wrt w3c social WG/IG: will the social WG provide any
> "recommendation" on a specific (set of) formats/URI schemes to use, or will
> the IG provide any "best practice/guidelines" to suggest the use of specific
> URI schemes (e.g. acct:) and profile/rels format (e.g. foaf, poco?)? or is
> this fully out of scope and anyone (including other community/sdo) may be free
> to combine what will be produced here with these other specs?
> > I hope I clarified my point.
>
> i think the key point here is to design things loosely coupled. as you
> pointed out, the main point is that we have to be able to link things.
> that can be achieved via link relations, which we can either reuse, or
> we have to maybe register some new ones.
>
> once we can use well-known link relations, we can leave it to runtime
> mechanisms (conneg) to figure out the concrete media type for a
> representation, so that we have decoupled the ability to link to a
> certain concept, and the concrete format that's used to represent that
> concept.
>
> the if the WG believes there's a need to develop a new format, we can do
> so and it will be nicely decoupled from the way it's linked. as we tried
> to point out in our workshop contribution, our main goal is to make sure
> that instead of creating The One True Model, the WG should try to
> develop components that fit into web architecture. these then can be
> developed and evolve independently, and probably (and hopefully) some
> will thrive and some will die. in our point of view, such a loosely
> coupled approach has the best chances of developing something that has
> the ability to evolve, and can be tweaked over time as required, without
> breaking things.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>
> --
> erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
>             | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
>             | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

Received on Friday, 1 August 2014 16:49:17 UTC