Re: Implementations (former: User stories for Social API)

Updated Connections,

Do we want to add -
Jive
MS Sharepoint
Salesforce Chatter
 - although I don't believe we've a representative from any of these

I agree with Henry on separate pages (I tend to use many smaller pages - 
although Connections shows Wiki page hierarchy on the left so makes this 
much more effective - sorry, shameless advertising, couldn't resist :-) )

Rgds,
-Bill.



From:   ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
To:     "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc:     Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" 
<public-socialweb@w3.org>, "public-social-interest@w3.org" 
<public-social-interest@w3.org>
Date:   11/02/2015 10:15
Subject:        Re: Implementations (former: User stories for Social API)



On 02/11/2015 10:56 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
> 
>> On 11 Feb 2015, at 10:51, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ 
<perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 02/10/2015 09:28 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>>> On 02/04/2015 06:22 AM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>> Please:
>>>>
>>>> * Feel free to update the user stories.
>>> I just edited partialy the wiki page to use Stories & Groupings 
approach
>>> we discussed during telecon.
>>>
>>> * https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Stories

>>> * https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Groupings

>>>
>>> I also added to the very top of the page:
>>>
>>> * use new sections with fragment links to stories to create groupings
>>> (see e.g. [[#Social Profiles]])
>>> * additionally you could use fragment links to tag stories (e.g.
>>> Groupings: [[#Profiles]] [[#Economy]])
>>> * do not rename stories! it will break links pointing to them from the
>>> groupings.
>>>
>>> Makes sense?
>> I also created *Implementations* section
>> 
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Implementations

>>
>> Including Open Platforms & Proprietary Platforms
>>
>> This way we can keep track on implementations. I already reached out to
>> Diaspora and Friendica communities, tracking it in
>> http://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/actions/1

> 
> I don't think that it is appropriate that the User Stories page contain 
an 
> implementation section.  That should be on a different page, and it can
> refer to this one. We are here to build the standards  which we can 
> implement. User Stories are here so that we can refer to them when we
> discuss protocol issues to see if we are not missing out on a story 
> by making a decision.
I find tracking open source implementations *curcial*, as well as take
into account proprietary ones. A future existing in popular mainstream
silo network gives us a strong signal about existing demand. Also , if
we don't provide clear means for implementing it, how can we expect
people to get out of those silos?

I don't mind moving this section to separate page, except possible issue
that this will make linking Stories and Groupings harder then just using
fragments like [[#Diaspora]] and [[#User posts a note]]

Instead [[Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#User posts a note | #User
posts a note]] and
[[Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories_implementations#Diaspora | #Diaspora]]

Hmmm... maybe we could just create a template for it? Any MediaWiki
wizards in da house? :)


[attachment "signature.asc" deleted by Bill Looby/Ireland/IBM]