- From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:14:17 -0400
- To: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
- Cc: "'Harry Halpin'" <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>
Hi Christine,
Le 10 juin 2009 à 05:07, Christine Perey a écrit :
> 1. What new insights will the fact that a service has (or has not)
> implemented A1 or A2 provide?
>
> How does knowing if a service has implemented one of these protocols
> help
> us? How does it help the service? The end users? Do we give the
> service a
> gold star? How is implementing OpenID (or another protocol on the
> list) more
> important or relevant than, for example, knowing if a service has
> implemented Facebook Connect (or, for purposes of argument, the
> MySpace
> equivalent)?
These are good questions, the most appropriate answer to that is:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:00:07 GMT
In About W3C: Technology
At http://www.w3.org/Consortium/technology
To achieve the goal of one Web, specifications for
the Web's formats and protocols must be compatible
with one another and allow (any) hardware and
software used to access the Web to work together.
W3C designs and promotes interoperable open
(non-proprietary) formats and protocols to avoid
the market fragmentation of the past.
W3C is here to create and/or formalize technologies in a way that will
be opened and encumbered by patents.
> 2. I believe objective B is vague/needs to be fleshed out. At least
> not
> clear to me. Can we say that we are seeking to document the "terms and
> conditions for user data confidentiality" in each service on the
> list or do
> we mean something more granular such as "can (or to what degree can,
> and how
> does) a community member control the access others ("others" needs
> to be
> defined) have to their personal data?"
It seems here that you are giving two classes of topic:
* Functional analysis, the description of mechanisms that help
people to interact with their data in relationships to others (in and
outside of the network)
* Legal analysis, what is the policy of the service around the
user data.
> 3. For objective C, I recommend that the study of context be defined
> more
> granularly as well.
> Possible fields:
> + Has the service implemented support for device location (if so is
> it
> using GPS, compass, cell triangulation, user entered data? All of the
> above?)?
GeoIP is another one.
> + Does the service have local peripheral or device/service awareness
> (e.g.,
> Bluetooth support)?
This would need to be defined. Is a webcam is local awareness?
Movement detectors?
When you say service, you mean a distant Web service has access
to some parameters of the devices? (such as in W3C Geolocation API)
> 4. Personally, I don't see how "C" has anything to do with mobile
> Web. Yes,
> context has more dimensions and potentially, more automatic support
> (e.g.,
> GPS is not usually found in a PC) when the user is mobile, but I don't
> understand the "mobile Web" part.
Some netbooks start to embark GPS.
Many laptops in Japan can be plugged and used with USB modem keys,
which makes you connected all the time. (working in trains)
--
Karl Dubost
Montréal, QC, Canada
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 11:14:26 UTC