- From: Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 08:54:00 -0500
- To: "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- CC: "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
On 2015-02-04 06:01 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote: > So all the user stories currently could be user stories for totally > siloed social networks. > YES. That is exactly the case. The difference is when you get to the developer stories. Those describe some unique advantages of using a standard API between client and server. If you'd like I can make this more explicit in the user cases. > We could extend the user stories to make them more clearly cross > organisational. That would be a grievous mistake at this point. We have as one of our deliverables a federation protocol. Our social API is the client-to-server piece; the federation protocol is the server-to-server piece. We should make a point of not putting forward a social API that isn't compatible with federation. However, it should not be dependent on federation. -Evan
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2015 13:54:24 UTC