W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2012

Re: Governance and Web Architecture ...

From: Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:24:58 -0400
Message-ID: <500F20BA.5000606@w3.org>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 07/23/2012 05:32 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
> I think "Tussle in Cyberspace" touches on related issues, but I'm not sure how it would affect our paper, or what we would reference.

When I read your draft, it appeared to me that your "governance" and
their "tussles" described the same or similar class of issues. Either
way, since that's a widely referenced paper, it would be handy to make
the connection or distinction.

> " I wonder about publishing it at a stage where it mostly describes
> problem areas, and barely outlines the solution framework. That invites
> people to quibble with the problem descriptions (as I could, in
> copyright, for example) rather than engaging with the architectural
> framework."
> I was working on the framework because I had trouble with boundaries on "publishing and linking" without at least a survey of the broader space into which it fits.
> So "why publish now" is: this is just a TAG working draft. It's public but it's still very much in progress. We're not asking for community review yet, but of course, contributions are welcome, as well as questions at the details.
> I'd like to hear your quibbles with the problem description. 

re: copyright, at least two:

> Piracy is the practice of obtaining and redisstributing works without regard to limitations placed on such distribution by the copyright owner.

"Piracy" is a contested term; "copyright infringement" is bounded by
legal limitations on the scope of the copyright right (fair use, first
sale, eventual expiration, etc.).

> The primary tradeoff that is involved in legislating copyright and piracy, then, is between restricting access to content and making content widely available.

at least a secondary piece of the tradeoff, as described earlier in the
paragraph, is innovation in the systems permitted to interface with
copyrighted material. DRM locks-down not only "content," but also
who/what can create and play it.

 And if you want to engage in the architectural framework, please review
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/publishingAndLinkingOnTheWeb.html

Thanks, I've had conversations with Jeni and Dan on earlier versions;
I'll look again.

What I want to see more of in this document is what we expect to learn
from the consideration of this cross-cutting set of "governance" issues.
It could be that we won't learn it until after the deeper examination of
each, but then a bit more fleshing out of the intro: what unifies these
problem areas? what defines them as "governance" and leaves others outside?

> which I'm hoping we'll FPWD asap.
> Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wseltzer@w3.org] 
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 6:39 AM
> To: Larry Masinter
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Governance and Web Architecture ...
> Hi Larry,
> On 07/19/2012 04:03 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> I've shared this privately with a few other tag members (Jonathan,
>> Ashok, Noah), and now am submitting to the TAG for consideration:
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/governanceFramework-2012-07-19.html
> You might want to refer Clark et. al's "Tussle in Cyberspace," paper,
> <http://groups.csail.mit.edu/ana/Publications/PubPDFs/Tussle%20in%20Cyberspace%20Defining%20Tomorrows%20Internet%202005%27s%20Internet.pdf>
> which takes a protocol-design perspective (their "tussles" seem to
> parallel your "governance" issues).
> from the paper:
> " ...We offer some design principles to deal with tussle.
>  Based on our preference that we accommodate tussle rather than
>  preclude it, our highest-level principle is:
>   * Design for tussle-for variation in outcome-so that the outcome can
>   be different in different places, and the tussle takes place within
>   the design, not by distorting or violating it. Do not design so as to
>   dictate the outcome. Rigid designs will be broken; designs that
>   permit variation will flex under pressure and survive.
>  Second, we identify a principle that strengthens the ability of an
>  architecture to accommodate tussle, and assists in the task of design
>  for change:
>   * Modularize the design along tussle boundaries, so that one tussle
>   does not spill over and distort unrelated issues."
>> (currently member-only, but should become world-readable as soon as I
>> can get someone to update the permissions.)
> I wonder about publishing it at a stage where it mostly describes
> problem areas, and barely outlines the solution framework. That invites
> people to quibble with the problem descriptions (as I could, in
> copyright, for example) rather than engaging with the architectural
> framework.
>> The idea was to create a general framework for analysis of the
>> interactions of governance and architecture ... governance being the
>> term we use to describe legislation, regulation, contractual
>> precedent and other ways of adding constraints based on societal
>> requirements, and architecture being the ways in which web systems
>> are constructed.
> What is that framework, and what suggestions are you offering
> policy-makers or technologists? I could imagine starting from principles
> such as those in Tussle: modularity, design for choice (and
> competition), open interfaces.
> --Wendy
>> In today's (informal) TAG call, we talked about using this framework
>> and developing it as a kind of introduction to "Publishing and
>> Linking"
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/publishingAndLinkingOnTheWeb-2012-07-16.html
>> but which would serve as a basis for other related documents about
>> other governance areas and architectural implications.

Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.863.0613
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 22:25:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:46 UTC