- From: Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:03:52 -0500
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
- CC: Carvalho Melvin <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Halpin Harry <hhalpin@w3.org>, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <54C96AD8.6090901@e14n.com>
SWAT0 is a terrible use-case for this discussion, since it's intended specifically for federation between sites. I'd really recommend sticking with the requirements that were devised with the client-to-server API in mind, so you don't confuse yourselves. Also: PLEASE take a look at the Open Social Activity Streams API. We can get most of what we need by using Activity Streams 2.0 documents as commands -- "post a photo", "post a comment", "like this photo". Relatively few endpoints and a lot of flexibility. I did a nice diagram showing an API with OpenSocial Activity Streams as the base: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/API/Layers It might be helpful to aid in your thinking. If you'd like to start sketching out a social API following these principles, let's connect on IRC. -Evan On 2015-01-28 11:37 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > Henry and I were talking on IRC, and started a web page for this: > > https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/LDP-SWAT0 > > > How often do you get to title a section of a document "Is Tantek > interested?" > > Seriously, I think SWAT0 is missing some spam and overload awareness. > > -- Sandro > > On 01/27/2015 04:04 PM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote: >> I would like to work on the LDP based API to fit the Evans' [1] and Swat0's [2] >> requirements. This is going to be most fun if we do it as a group, so perhaps >> those of us here who have experience with LDP and those who would like to learn >> about how to think of it could gather and try to work out in a light weight manner >> how to sketch the main outlines of such an API. >> >> We could do this on the rww Community Group perhaps [3] and report on the W3C Social >> Web WG iteratively the results ( so that the learning curve does not end up being too >> high ). >> >> It would be good if as a group we could work out what the required results of this >> work should be. >> >> Henry >> >> >> >>> On 27 Jan 2015, at 21:41, Harry Halpin<hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> My proposal was that we take Evan Prodromou's draft requirements [1] >>> for an API and see if Evan and others interested can whiteboard an API for that >>> addresses SWAT0 [2] (and as much of the requirements EvanP found as the >>> editors think are reasonable for the API), keeping in mind OpenSocial's >>> previous work and LDP in mind in order to pave the cowpaths. >>> >>> Then, as long as SWAT0 and any other requirements are clearly >>> demarcated, we could at least start discussing a draft API in more >>> concrete terms. >>> >>> cheers, >>> harry >>> >>> [1]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Requirements >>> [2]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/federatedsocialweb/wiki/SWAT0 >> [3]http://www.w3.org/community/rww/ >> >> >> >> Social Web Architect >> http://bblfish.net/ >> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2015 23:04:16 UTC