- From: <jeff@sayremedia.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:57:17 -0800
- To: "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: "Stéphane Corlosquet" <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, nathan@webr3.org, "Melvin Carvalho" <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, "WebID XG" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
In the social networking space, it is important to remember that a webpage is dynamically assembled from disparate data resources. The content displayed is an amalgam of contributions from different people. Thus it is rarely the case that the contents of an entire page will be owned and controlled by a single person (entity). It is also important to remember that social networking is about user streams--the assemblage of content contributions that coalesce to create a conversation, to capture interaction between users. That is what makes it a social experience. > On 10 Feb 2011, at 15:11, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote: >> >> The fact that on the Web, you do not know who authored each bit of a >> page. With regards to not knowing “who authored each bit of a page”, that can easily be addressed. Each piece of datum can be marked up with a WebID to indicate the owner of a particular content contribution. So, even on a given user’s profile page, any data that was not created by and is not owned or controlled by the profile owner, can clearly be indicated. Of course, implementing that facility would be up to the overall platform owners. > On February 10, 2011 9:39, Henry Story wrote: >> >> (This thread is a bit skizzo. Here we are in the part of this thread >> giving advice to FB) With regards to discussions about FB, I believe that we should not make any assumptions about what they will or will not do when it comes to WebID. They created their own customized ontology with OGP instead of using the already available open ontologies. Some speculate that they may be trying to “win” the identity wars by turning their platform into the largest, proprietary identity protocol broker on the Web. They will do what is in their best business interest. If WebID serves a business purpose, then they will implement it to the extent that they see fit. All we can do is put forth a series of WebID use cases and then let the various social networks, including FB, decide how and if they will use it. Since the Social Web is about the global conversation and usage space and not just about what happens within a single, often siloed, social network, I suggest that at this time we concentrate more on the fundamentals of WebID, and not on how a particular space may or may not implement WebID. Our WebID use cases should provide a sufficient width and breadth so that current and future open and proprietary Web-based systems can properly evaluate the virtues of WebID for their specific use. Whereas I do agree that conversations like this are informative and useful in helping us craft our WebID use cases, I think that trying to solve very specific and unique technical WebID implementations for a particular, proprietary player, such as FB, may not be in our best interest at this time. Jeff http://jeffsayre.com/
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2011 16:57:51 UTC