W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > March 2015

story: Developing a Smart Client

From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 17:52:36 +0100
Message-Id: <11221287-FF6A-4133-A4BA-32523CDF6638@bblfish.net>
To: Social Web Working Group <public-socialweb@w3.org>
Sorry, I have been busy and have not had time to discuss the stories with individuals. I don't think
that there would be time to do this anyway in a week. So I'll bring things up here on the list.

We have two stories that are somewhat similar but not very much.
 1. General Social Network Client
 2. Developing a Smart client

The reason was that at some point the stories were organised in themes and these were in the API usage theme,
and these were just introductions to the story that followed. So since Evan did things this way, I followed suite, adjusting a little the initial story. Then the stories were moved around with no hierarchy, and so like a lot of other stories the context was then lost.

Just to save going to the web here are the stories:

1. General Social Network Client - 
   • Conchita is an iOS developer. She creates a native iOS social client.
   • Denise downloads Conchita's application to her iPhone. She starts the program and shares her authentication credentials and the social API endpoints for her social network server.
   • Conchita's application determines the version of the social API that the server implements. The application only uses API calls that are defined in that version.
   • Denise can then do any of the tasks indicated by the above user stories that Conchita's software supports.

2. Developing a Smart Client 

   • Conchita is an iOS and Android developer. She creates a native social client iFoaf that allows people to explore friends of friends networks across the world. 
   • She developed a version for blind people, one for people with sight problems, and one very elegant version.
   • The application only consumes data published by the server and interacts using the Social Web API. This is what allows her to refine the UI needs for the particular groups of disabilities in question.

Notes on the markings:
A. The stories are similar in that they use the same name Conchita and speak of a phone
  Oddly enough the second story gets lots of -1s for being "similar" to the first. Whereas the first gets no -1 for being similar to the second. 
B. Tanek has a -1 on the second story because it emphasises accessibility and that should be everywhere. But 
  why should a story not emphasise something every implementation has?

So in my view neither of those -1 carries through.

I think they could just be merged. What stops conchita developing an Android application after an iphone one?


Social Web Architect
Received on Saturday, 7 March 2015 16:53:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 8 December 2016 15:48:20 UTC