[Freedombox-discuss] fully-decentralised forums
knygar at gmail.com
Fri Sep 16 02:13:14 UTC 2011
thank you Melvin Carvalho,
i have written the reply to you, just had no time to finish it, yet :)
now isn't the reply but some comments:
.. foafpress.org is the best example and alive implementation of foaf
among what i'v seen.
> WebID is the one I like best so far.
what do you think of BrowserID's approach BTW?
is it all wrong and central-authority tighten (i hope not ,
i hope in personal mail-hosting, but the solutions aren't the turn-key
yet, like it is needed. Maybe we (i mean the developers of self-servers,
would contribute to this:)
or it is a bright idea, given that 'anything' of the current gen Web
- by identity management, is, anyway - tightened to the email accounts..>?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 September 2011 21:30, ya knygar <knygar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's alive as far as I know. :)
>> well, its alive but there isn't enough of life - as for me.
>> From what i see as a subscriber to public FSW list,
>> currently it is Not active.
>> I think - most of initiatives from Brad Kipfer's wiki
>> that was mentioned in the first post - doesn't working with/into FSW.
>> Maybe it would be slightly better when they would transfer the propositions
>> to W3C Community Group discussion systems,
>> For sure - that CA or USA meet up or any Face-to-faces before
>> aren't helpful at all - as for me,
>> as for any concurrent edition social network i know, including
>> XCCC (you might be interested in our
>> helping with better algorithms - http://primarypad.com/OeMj2ZnZqo
>> contact me please, if you have some questions/wish to help).
>> Ok, we are in XCCC - kind of small, who cares that
>> we leave on other sides of the planet in W3C CA.
>> There was the big and at some point - great Google Wave,
>> now it's code in big brave Apache Wave,
>> i can't see nothing as propositions from FSW.
>> having somewhere the site and somewhere the list
>> doesn't help to encourage Federated Social Web
>> I don't think that - if we need to see FSW now,
>> we have needed it yesterday --
>> the "Lots of very smart people in that group"
>> isn't succeeded or working productively in the
>> right direction. Not at all.
>> @Melvin Carvalho
>> So - what should i do? (i just mean that,
>> maybe you could advice :)
>> what have i done:
>> i'm proposing the
>> One place -- W3C FSW group to work into,
>> around. We doesn't receive any feedback about
>> protocols we propose on it's list. Not a one message,
>> than - i increasingly hear - even here, that
>> well - who cares of FSW - there are some one-two
>> popular networks that work under - as it is standardization org.
>> What should we do in
>> such a case? create the better alternative to the "FSW"
>> initiative? maybe OWF has these clever people and
>> they want to work here for FSW? Foundation with money?
>> these aren't rhetorical questions, i really need your advice.
>> now a bit of rhetoric:
>> You'v seen the "We need..." wiki, you'v seen the rough list of existing
>> as a reply for 'your' 2nd variant
>> -- how do you think
>> -- to how many of these initiatives FSW proposed/recommended
>> to use - at least -
>> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/WYSIWYM editor
>> to help the FSW in that way..?
>> -- for how many - the previous W3C SW group - proposed?
>> For all this time.
>> Semantic conceptions isn't something new, in the end,
>> Ok.. another example
>> -- for the 1st variant
>> -- we have some ActivityStreams something..
>> some popular status.net instances, some FB, some MySpace
>> kind of supported it.. let's say -- we have some RSS/Atom for many years
>> already.. Do you see some FedSocWeb from it's existence? i'm not.
>> Do you think OStatus as the mighty all-including specification
>> would lead the 'FSW' group to make FSW?
>> Don't get me wrong please, i - really like the Semantic Web idea,
>> i really, really like the Open Data.
>> We are trying hard to implement
>> the Semantic-ability in XCCC nets. I think - RDF in JSON
>> or just the clever XML
>> -- something like this - could be used into p2p and other crazy-mixed
>> social networking, to help the Semantic, eventually Federated Web.
>> What do you think of JSON for semantic BTW(by-the-way)?
>> I hope we would manage to combine it all with some clever Identity system,
>> so semantic wouldn't mean unsecured or un-private.
>> (I have found http://openetherpad.org/fXuqiu8nem
>> i think - you - really may help young XCCC that is
>> aiming into Boxes and FNF projects -- to make the
>> proper decisions! you could just write any opinion
>> under the 9. objective on that Primarypad link)
>> But, i have a feeling,
>> !just a feeling that - mixing the GUI's with data to transfer
>> the data isn't the best way for performance or security.
>> Maybe if there would be best DB, like -- ok, we have Camlistore for almost
>> everything or Tahoe.. or everything through some ultrafast and cool WebDAV..
>> .. i don't have the answers for these, and i don't see that if i am or
>> anyone would
>> post it to FSW list - there would be insightful reaction. Maybe
>> you - Melvin Carvalho - know some answers?
>> PS: one and a half more questions to you-
>> You have the nice site,
>> - how have you filled it with RDF, visual markers?
>> i mean - do you know any great framework maybe
>> the preferable WYM.. or something planned
>> - for this,
>> or it is all by hand and meant like it would be ok for
>> dedicated users of fbx's , for example?
> BTW same concept, but a better UI :)
> For example see:
> Which I think is a reasonable looking profile page...
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Melvin Carvalho
>> <melvincarvalho at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 14 September 2011 14:11, ya knygar <knygar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> we/you would need to breath the life to the FederatedSocialWeb.net
>>>> before we/you would see it, probably ;)
>>> It's alive as far as I know. :)
>>> Lots of very smart people in that group. I think they are having a
>>> meetup in san francisco.
>>> There's two rough approaches, both have merits IMHO
>>> 1. The FSW is slightly more top down, going from the activity streams schema
>>> 2. The other is slightly more bottom up, defining arbitrarly keys and
>>> values, more of a "NoSQL" style.
>>> For example, you can see from my homepage (a relatively normal
>>> homepage with some "rel" links)
>>> A. Click on the "RDF" view at the top
>>> B. Then Click on bblfish
>>> C. Then Click on Jonas Smedegaard etc.
>>> D. Or click on one of the properties in a page ... eg interests have a
>>> whole date layer -- there's 100s of ecosystems iinked together
>>> You can get lost in there for ages, but it's already a federated
>>> social web existing today across many servers. (It's going to be
>>> awesome when FBX can become part of it)
>>> Hopefully both approaches will converge over time!
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
More information about the Freedombox-discuss