- From: Tim Anglade <tim.anglade@af83.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:29:16 +0200
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Cc: Alex Korth <alex@ttbc.de>, Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>, "public-xg-socialweb@w3.org" <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>
Hey there Le 27 juil. 09 à 12:20, Harry Halpin a écrit : > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Alex Korth<alex@ttbc.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This issue is feature that an ID provider, who is dedicated to take >> care of >> your stuff and who has access to it, is the right entity to provide. >> In general and as said, users need reach control over their >> content. If a >> service is given access to content that is hosted by the user's >> IDP, this >> access must be revokeable if the user changes his mind. It's a life >> cycle of >> access that ends somewhen. To me it is straight forward for the IDP >> to ask >> the user what should happen to his content when he dies. Who cares >> if an >> account is not deleted? It's the party pics that must go offline! >> There is another aspect at the end of content's lifecycle that's >> strongly >> related to the issue of a user passing away: forgetting. Our brains >> have a >> feature to forget outdated stuff to free memory. > > Sounds like a rather depressing, but useful, use-case. For example, > one might want their content to become a sort of electronic memorial > for oneself, which does mean embarassing party pics must go, but > family members might want to add new photos, use the "wall" to share > memories, and the like. Anyone want to write this up? I'm interested in the subject but wouldn't even know where to start. This is such a heavily cultural, ethnical & personal issue, I'm not sure we'd be able to categorize alternate paths or catalog enough of them to cover the issue satisfactorily. Are we looking for just a couple of user stories or a detailed look at current & possible solutions around the eventuality? Cheers, Tim
Received on Monday, 27 July 2009 10:29:52 UTC