Understanding the Video and Decision Making?
David Recordon
Sorry for starting a new thread, but I think some of the important
questions around the video are getting buried in the "slogan" thread
(http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/browse_thread/
thread/403d6f94b2e3ba92/). I'm currently very confused as to what is
happening with the video, beyond Chris informing everyone that Michael
Pick is already making one. I've search the group but as far as I can
tell there has been *zero discussion* about making a video let alone
what the video is about. Requests to see the script of the video have
also been ignored which I think is leading to more of this confusion.
I'm not trying to stand in the way of progress, but agree with
Frederick Glasson who posted in the thread asking, "Are we not
currently trying to define the basic concepts, ideas, problematic,
etc?" As the group received a lot of media attention last week with
Google, Facebook, Flickr, Six Apart, Plaxo, and LinkedIn joining, it
feels to me that developing principals at least around how the group
makes decisions is incredibly necessary. All that I've found so far
is that final decisions are made by Chris Saad (http://
groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web/workgroup-roadmap).
While the evangelism for data portability (not lowercase) is extremely
important, we must ensure to balance it with building a productive and
health community that produces technical results.
Can someone please shed some light on all of this?
Thanks,
--David
Chris Saad
Michael is making a video because he has chosen to as a personal
project - it was not a decision by anyone.
I totally agree that I wish we would get as much participation on the
road map that we do on the slogan! I have asked repeatedly for
comments and input on it but no one seems to be doing anything (other
than the slogan) besides me, Paul, Zef and Josh at this point!
Also, my presence in decision making is only used for two extreme
cases.
1. Initial decisions while the board is being formed for the first
time.
2. If there is some sort of tie in the decision of the vote for
Chairperson
I welcome better ideas and others to pitch in!
Join in David :)
Chris
Joseph Smarr
that so many influential people have expressed their desire to work on
data portability by joining this group, and the positive attention
we've received is great validation that this is an important thing to
work on. I want to move forward with speed and agility, and I think
the best way to do that is to start with a high-level dialog amongst
the principals involved about where we're coming from, what we're
hoping to achieve, what we're worried about, how we think we can work
together, and so on. My hope is after some lively debate, we can agree
on a shared set of goals and principles that will in turn lay the
groundwork for actual specs and implementations. Rushing ahead with
blueprints and specs before we all get a chance to talk together and
pick a shared path with shared values is, IMO, putting the cart before
the horse. We all want to get there, and let's make sure we do it the
right way: by first taking the time to understand one another as
peers.
Thanks, js
Chris Saad
hopes and dreams....
My Philosophy: As users, our identity, photos, videos and other forms
of personal data should be discoverable by, and shared between our
chosen (and trusted) tools or vendors. We need a DHCP for Identity. A
distributed File System for data. The technologies already exist, we
simply need a complete reference design to put the pieces together.
My Mission: To put all existing technologies and initiatives in
context to create a reference design for end-to-end Data Portability.
To promote that design to the developer, vendor and end-user
community.
And I think the next step should be to...
1. Flesh out the road map (http://groups.google.com/group/
dataportability-public/web/workgroup-roadmap)
2. While starting on the current point 1 and 2 (Decision Making
Structure and Clarifying the Mission further).
Who wants to go next :)
Chris
David Recordon
From the mission you listed, "To put all existing technologies and
Data Portability. To promote that design to the developer, vendor and
goal. It feels very much like some of the missions of groups in large
(e.g. the ITU) standards organizations.
Eran Hammer-Lahav (who has since left the group) expressed a very
similar sentiment last week at
http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability/browse_thread/thread/e5f502657188f35f.
> I noticed the mission statement last night: "Designing, Implementing
> and Evangelizing the Personal Data Portability Stack in Concrete
> Terms". Seems like a bit of a paradox to me. Nothing in that statement
> fits my expectation of 'concrete terms', and the scope of this effort
> is just not possible. This is not a 'mission', It's a 'mission:
> impossible'.
Like Joseph I want to see this effort succeed and agree with him that
we first need to "talk together and pick a shared path with shared
values". As the dynamics of this group changed immensely last week, I
think we need to take a step back to acknowledge that, introduce all
of the new members (so far only Plaxo has sent any sort of email of
those that joined), and understand what everyone brings to the table
and would like to see solved.
Maybe it is as simple as starting with a page for "principals" and
another one for "goals". Let everyone add things to them and then we
can, as a growing community, make decisions about what they should be.
--David
Elias Bizannes
there are no leaders.
Chris has done an amazing job pulling together everyone. He's a friend
of mine, and I know first hand, that is what his strength is. But I
don't see anyone else stepping up.
It seems like people are waiting for everyone to solve the issues -
this thread, though is great. The workgroup members should start
introducing themselves and going in to edit the documents as they do.
Last I heard, Chris started a roadmap document, and asked for people
to contribute...
Chris Saad
Can you start those two page stubs and get the ball rolling?
Link us here so we can all join in!
Maybe tweak the road map also so that it includes those two documents
as first/early steps.
Chris
On Jan 15, 11:10 am, David Recordon <record...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Chris,
> From the mission you listed, "To put all existing technologies and
> initiatives in context to create a reference design for end-to-end
> Data Portability. To promote that design to the developer, vendor and
> end-user community." I'm unsure if we'll ever be able to achieve that
> goal. It feels very much like some of the missions of groups in large
> (e.g. the ITU) standards organizations.
>
> Eran Hammer-Lahav (who has since left the group) expressed a very
marccanter
I also love leaders who step up.
And best of all - I love the notion of shared values and goals.
Here we go!
David Recordon
Goals - http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web/overview-goals
Principals - http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web/overview-principals
I couldn't figure out how to make them show up correctly in the list
on http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web.
--David
Chris Saad
@David - fantastic thanks - I have re-arranged them for you.
Cheers,
Chris
On Jan 15, 11:39 am, David Recordon <record...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure!
>
> Goals -http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web/overview-goals
> Principals -http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability-public/web/overview-pr...
> I couldn't figure out how to make them show up correctly in the list
Frederick Giasson
> Michael is making a video because he has chosen to as a personal
> project - it was not a decision by anyone.
>
> I totally agree that I wish we would get as much participation on the
> road map that we do on the slogan! I have asked repeatedly for
> comments and input on it but no one seems to be doing anything (other
> than the slogan) besides me, Paul, Zef and Josh at this point!
>
Like developing an ontology with a community, many people are subscribed
to the list, but only a couple of people really work things out. This is
particularly true for DP, and I have to admit, I start to think that
many people are subscribed for the hype, and not really for the content,
the concepts, and all the questions it rises. Even how this can change
business and ultimately our life...
So, with 600 people subscribed, expect 6 to 10 people that will most
than likely work for on it :)
Also, so far, it is not because "google, plaxo, or whatever the
"companies""... what this means? I didn't notice any writing or whatever
coming from them (at least not since I am here)... now Mozilla, etc. So
far it is all about hype (in my opinion). People that really care about
the project: its ideas and concepts, will have to work and get things
done, one by one... some kind of doing their own business. Personally I
won't count on other people than the ones that stated the project, and a
couple of others. There is only one way to do a job: by doing it, and
not thinking about doing it... :)
Just my two pennies.
Take care,
Fred
Frederick Giasson
> Just to echo David's comments with my own take: it's an awesome thing
> that so many influential people have expressed their desire to work on
> data portability by joining this group, and the positive attention
> we've received is great validation that this is an important thing to
> work on. I want to move forward with speed and agility, and I think
>
Influential people are influential because they working on things that
changed things. These people (that are all companies except for some
people) have to enter in this debate, bring ideas and share thoughts. It
is possible that they change things in certain domains, but if these
influential people are not participating, they won't change this one.
This is about communication and discussion. Saying that I participate is
not participating :) This can be counted in action.
A project doesn't evolve and emerge with desire. A project evolve and
emerge and change things by working according to these desire. I had the
desire, years ago, to change my World with semantic web ideas,
principles and technologies. I am working on this, day after day. Will I
change the World? I don't know (and not really care since I have so much
fun!) but I least I work to reach that goal.
But anyway, the group shouldn't loose track and put its minds into
clouds because of all the hype around it. There is a job that has to be
done.
> the best way to do that is to start with a high-level dialog amongst
> the principals involved about where we're coming from, what we're
> hoping to achieve, what we're worried about, how we think we can work
> together, and so on. My hope is after some lively debate, we can agree
> on a shared set of goals and principles that will in turn lay the
> groundwork for actual specs and implementations. Rushing ahead with
>
Sure, but there are more than a slogan, and it is what David said I
think. I already know people, really intelligent people, that
unsubscribed from this list because, as one said: "was actually thinking
about unsubscribing; poor signal/noise ratio)
It is about balance and focus.
> blueprints and specs before we all get a chance to talk together and
> pick a shared path with shared values is, IMO, putting the cart before
> the horse. We all want to get there, and let's make sure we do it the
> right way: by first taking the time to understand one another as
> peers.
>
Well, unfortunately, I doubt there is a a clear path to do it. We will
come and go in many directions I think :)
It is about actions here. Getting things done.
Take care,
Fred
Frederick Giasson
> I think the problem with the dataportability movement so far is that
> there are no leaders.
>
>
Like in any groups, leaders will emerge.
However, I would add one more item more or less related to that:
introducing and making relations with other groups of people working on
the same ideas.
The Linked Data Community is one of them [1]
The Open Knowledge Definition group is another one [2]
And I am sure there are many others...
[1]
http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/CommunityProjects/LinkingOpenData
[2] http://www.opendefinition.org/
Take care,
Fred