The Vision Thing
Steven Greenberg
Information should be stored in ways that make it reusable, and
people should be able to reuse it.
So broad you could make a competitive event out of swimming it.
It has the advantage of being open ended, extremely short, and pretty
close to what people think of when they hear the words "Data
Portability". Things like permissions, open standards, and multi-site
portability are left implied because those are implementation details.
What is data portability? People should be able to reuse stuff.
Why make it harder?
Christian Scholz / Tao Takashi (SL)
<gree...@puzzlingevidence.net> wrote:
>
> To me, this is the ideal driving DataPortability.org:
>
> Information should be stored in ways that make it reusable, and
> people should be able to reuse it.
>
> So broad you could make a competitive event out of swimming it.
>
> It has the advantage of being open ended, extremely short, and pretty
> close to what people think of when they hear the words "Data
> Portability". Things like permissions, open standards, and multi-site
> portability are left implied because those are implementation details.
Well, as said before, the controlling aspect is my main issue in this
whole thing.. I believe that information over time will flow freely
although it will take time to persuade the big players to really make
it free. But the main issue for me stays then that the user is in
control. I think many attempts at open protocols somehow miss this
point and just assume that everything is public.
But then again I am more keen spending my time on working on the
specifics on this instead of trying to find a vision which fits it.
So as long as we can reinstantiate the policy group and work on this
there I am ok with keeping the vision like that.
-- Christian