Compatibility with Portable Contacts - Social API Spec

[drobin]

The draft spec currently states:
"The OpenSocial RESTful protocol is wire-compatible with Portable Contacts version 1.0"

How specific do we want to be?  Is the current version of the Portable Contacts spec the implementers draft - Draft 1C ?

The Portable Contacts specification that we point to only claims compatibility with  ->   OpenSocial RESTful Protocol version 0.8.1 and
from what I can tell, their link back to OpenSocial is broken.  Something seems strange there.

[Henry Saputra]

I believe there is a discussion about dropping support for Portable
Contact for OpenSocial specs.

Maybe James Snell or Mark W could help to chime in about the progress/
discussions on this issue?

- Henry

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec/-/qI96G9O4znMJ.
> To post to this group, send email to
> opensocial-an...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> opensocial-and-gadg...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec?hl=en.

[David Robinson]

Henry,

Maybe so.  I saw Mark was trying to have a face to face with the PoCo folks while at OSCON next week.  That left me with the impression that OpenSocial was still trying to sync up with them.

[James M Snell]

We should know more after the face to face... however, up to this
point there hasn't been any progress on this point.

[Ryan Baxter]

Any details on when the face to face is taking place?

>> > opensocial-and-gadgets-spec@googlegroups.com.

>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>> > opensocial-and-gadgets-spec+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

>> > For more options, visit this group at
>> > http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec?hl=en.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to

>> opensocial-and-gadgets-spec@googlegroups.com.

>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

>> opensocial-and-gadgets-spec+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group.
> To post to this group, send email to

> opensocial-and-gadgets-spec@googlegroups.com.

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> opensocial-and-gadgets-spec+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Mark W.]

I didn't hear anything back from the PcCo folks. I think it's OK if we remove that language.

[Laurent-Walter Goix]

 would this mean that here are intentions to drop this compatibility? afaik the Person object model in OS is the same as the one in PoCo (also referenced by OStatus), which is very helpful is enabling to use the same data model in both worlds (inside the social network with OpenSocial and outside with OStatus). mentioning this alignment in the OS spec (and the intention to keep it aligned, which may also require little changes in the references from PoCo to OS) is a guarantee and reminder of this fair intention...

if not, could you remind the reasons for dropping this text?