Wiki Updates
Christian Scholz / Tao Takashi (SL)
I just finished various wiki updates such as:
- I described 3 use cases in more detail and linked them from the Use
Case page (registering with an SN, obtaining profile, obtaining
contacts):
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Best+Practices+Documents
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/UC001+Member+registers+with+a+new+Social+Network
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/UC002+System+retrieves+profile+information+for+a+user
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/UC003+System+retrieves+contacts+for+a+user
- I renamed the Best Practices Document to Best Practices Document 1 -
Login and Discovery and created a link page which links to this now
(I will add 2 more about profile and contacts tomorrow):
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Best+Practices+Documents
(more introduction could be in there maybe)
- I tried to rework this document based on the Skype chat discussions
we had. I did not copy it over yet as the original has more comments,
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Copy+of+Best+Practices+Document+1+-++Login+and+Discovery
I introduced some new terms here, namely Data Provider, Data
Consumer and Service Catalogue Provider. While all those can be
implemented by one service I found it easier to separate these out
to list requirements and processes for those individually.
Some general notes on the pages:
Julians use case partly went into the Use Cases mentioned above. The
technical bits seemed to be covered by the Technical Specs we have. I
wasn't sure though if
we should add those issues there or in the BP document. We also need
some process to resolve those issues namely the MF/FOAF debate. As
there once was some
talk about such processes, did this reach some solution?
What do we do with the Action list? I think this is more about
adoption, so should this be a separate page with such Action Items?
What is the best wiki structure? I was a bit confused when trying to
navigate it. I started with Technical Action Group, clicked then
somewhere and suddenly
was in the Initiatives namespace. Using the breadcrumbs on top did not
bring me back to e.g. the Overview page. I would propose to reparent
them to be
under the Technical Action Group and the initiatives page just link to
it (no idea how reparenting works though).
The page http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Technical
might also need some rework. The question is what the most important
documents are and
I think these are the Best Practices, Use Cases and Technical
Specifications (btw, this link was missing, I restored it to have the
list of all those specs available again).
So maybe those should be on top and explained a bit more.
I am actually not sure what the rest of the links is (but I also
didn't look closely on them. Is one a list of standards? Should this
be there?)
So please give feedback, esp. on the new format for the BP document:
http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Copy+of+Best+Practices+Document+1+-++Login+and+Discovery
(so that we can maybe rename it and move it over).
good night :-)
-- Christian
--
Christian Scholz
Tao Takashi (Second Life name)
taota...@gmail.com
Blog/Podcast: http://mrtopf.de/blog
Planet: http://worldofsl.com
Company: http://comlounge.net
Tech Video Blog: http://comlounge.tv
IRC: MrTopf/Tao_T
Julian Bond
4 May 2008 03:28:49
>What do we do with the Action list? I think this is more about
>adoption, so should this be a separate page with such Action Items?
Hmmm.
- Standards without adoption are pointless :)
- Agreed, some of it is adoption. But some of it is absolutely necessary
if we're going to demo all this
- I really wanted to point out work that needs to be done. It's a call
to action as much as just a list of possible actions.
- I was careful to point out where DP can help existing groups to move
forwards.
But I'm also not sure where to put all this stuff in the Wiki.
--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
Never Exceed Vehicle Capacity Load
Christian Scholz / Tao Takashi (SL)
> >What do we do with the Action list? I think this is more about
> >adoption, so should this be a separate page with such Action Items?
>
> Hmmm.
> - Standards without adoption are pointless :)
Right :-)
I would see some of the action points in the evangelism group btw.
> - Agreed, some of it is adoption. But some of it is absolutely necessary
> if we're going to demo all this
> - I really wanted to point out work that needs to be done. It's a call
> to action as much as just a list of possible actions.
Right.
> - I was careful to point out where DP can help existing groups to move
> forwards.
Let's try to go through this:
1) Work with the XRDS-Simple people to define, document and give
examples of entries for common services.
Job of the technical action group. Might be a project.
2) Work with and encourage the DiSo (and others) people to develop
plugins that create and manage an XRDS file for the common blog
platforms. Work with them also to build plugins to create other
related systems such as the microformatted list of the blogger's
profile URLs. Help them to document these plugins as they are written,
with examples.
The same. Somebody here who has a good wire to them? I also wonder if
they see us as sort of competitors or something like that. This
apparently wouldn't be good so some communication here would be great
(maybe even somebody who implements something for both parties). Is
this something for the implementors action group actually?
3) Work with the OpenID people and JanRain to enhance and extend the
Yadis auto- discovery libraries to parse XRDS and provide the service
entries in an easily digestible form during the OpenID discovery
process. Document recipes and examples that build on the Plaxo OpenID
consumer guide on implementing a DP aware OpenID consumer
This can of course also be added on top of the OpenID lib and maybe
provided as a patch. But with them is better of course. Anybody has
links to them?
The problem with all of that is of course that it needs to be done for
various languages.
4) Work with the FOAF people to come up with a recommended set of
namespaces, best practice and file layout-structure that is easy to
create and read. Help and encourage the development of parsers that
understand this best practice layout in all major languages. Work to
define, document and give examples of putting private FOAF behind
oAuth.
Probably also a TODO for the tech group in a separate project.
5) Work with the microformat people to define, document and give
examples of best practice use of microformats. Help and encourage the
development of parsers that understand this best practice in all major
languages.
likewise.
6) Work with the people developing the other major profile and contact
list standards to make sure their standards work well with the
"Profiles and Contacts population during initial signup" use case.
include them in 1) above.
likewise.
7) Develop and demonstrate prototypes of all of the above.
I think here is some work done already. I work on Plone, Josh on his
project, you on Voidstar. If we can make these compatible then we
should have a good milestone.
8) Encourage bloggers and the smaller hosted services and networks to
implement the above. In particular, working one to one with the so
called "Alpha-Bloggers".
This is what I see in the evangelism group.
So what about adding a section "Projects" to list the ones important
for the technical group? It just might be a question of manpower
though. But at least having the list would still be good so people can
choose what they want to do if they want to help.
Chris Saad
As a user/developer, I have no idea where to begin.
It was just 2 documents - now its 50 Christian.
We need to solve this IA problem urgently.
I should be able to click on the 'For Developers' section from the
home page, and on the top of the far right column I need to be lead to
the best practices - a document that explains exactly what I should do
as of 'today'.
Chris
On May 3, 6:28 pm, "Christian Scholz / Tao Takashi (SL)"
> Hi there!
>
> I just finished various wiki updates such as:
>
> - I described 3 use cases in more detail and linked them from the Use
> Case page (registering with an SN, obtaining profile, obtaining
> contacts):
> http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Best+Practices+Documents
> http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/UC002+System+retrieves...
> http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/UC003+System+retrieves...
> - I renamed the Best Practices Document to Best Practices Document 1 -
> Login and Discovery and created a link page which links to this now
> (I will add 2 more about profile and contacts tomorrow):
> http://wiki.dataportability.com/display/dpmain/Best+Practices+Documents
> (more introduction could be in there maybe)
>
> - I tried to rework this document based on the Skype chat discussions
> we had. I did not copy it over yet as the original has more comments,
> I introduced some new terms here, namely Data Provider, Data
> Consumer and Service Catalogue Provider. While all those can be
> implemented by one service I found it easier to separate these out
> to list requirements and processes for those individually.
>
> Some general notes on the pages:
>
> Julians use case partly went into the Use Cases mentioned above. The
> technical bits seemed to be covered by the Technical Specs we have. I
> wasn't sure though if
> we should add those issues there or in the BP document. We also need
> some process to resolve those issues namely the MF/FOAF debate. As
> there once was some
> talk about such processes, did this reach some solution?
>
> What do we do with the Action list? I think this is more about
> adoption, so should this be a separate page with such Action Items?
>
> What is the best wiki structure? I was a bit confused when trying to
> navigate it. I started with Technical Action Group, clicked then
> somewhere and suddenly
> was in the Initiatives namespace. Using the breadcrumbs on top did not
> bring me back to e.g. the Overview page. I would propose to reparent
> them to be
> under the Technical Action Group and the initiatives page just link to
> it (no idea how reparenting works though).
>
> documents are and
> I think these are the Best Practices, Use Cases and Technical
> Specifications (btw, this link was missing, I restored it to have the
> list of all those specs available again).
> So maybe those should be on top and explained a bit more.
>
> I am actually not sure what the rest of the links is (but I also
> didn't look closely on them. Is one a list of standards? Should this
> be there?)
>
> (so that we can maybe rename it and move it over).
>
> good night :-)
>
> -- Christian
>
> --
> Christian Scholz
> Tao Takashi (Second Life name)
Christian Scholz / Tao Takashi (SL)
> I think there are way too many documents now
>
> As a user/developer, I have no idea where to begin.
>
> It was just 2 documents - now its 50 Christian.
Well, I would simply list 3 items at the overview page:
- Use Cases (what are we trying to solve?)
- Best Practices (how it's solved)
- maybe Technical Specifications as a list of all the specs we created.
So for implementing something the BP docs are the starting point.
Of course beneath them there are more documents but I don't really see
the problem
with it as long as people have a starting point (the BP docs).
We can of course also merge the BP overview with this doc. so everything is on:
http://wiki.dataportability.org/display/dpmain/Technical
We can also add a short description of what the use case is about in
the Use Case section but I really would like to keep the more formal
and verbose format of those use case documents.
-- Christian
--
Christian Scholz
Tao Takashi (Second Life name)