Agreed.
Whether you do this as a flag on relationship, or by having two
relationship tags defining a relationship instead of one, is
debatable.
So, a tag saying 'Alice is a friend of Bob' and another saying 'Bob is
a friend of Alice' would together define a bidirectional
representation of a friend.
Import from a system like elgg or livejournal where friends are not
bidi to one where they are would probably have to trigger some
conflict resolution - confirmation emails etc as suggested.
Marcus
On Aug 6, 9:29 pm,
chris.mess...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think bidi relationship statuses could be offered in the spec but
> should not be required. For example, "following" has become common as
> of late (see Twitter) and bi-directionality is not only *not*
> required, but possibly the minority situation.
>
> As well, bi-directionality is contextual: perhaps we follow each other
> on Twitter but not on Tumblr or some other such site.
>
> Take a look at the spec coming out of
portablecontacts.net for more
> thinking on this.
>
> Chris
>
> On 8/6/08, Tse-Wen Tom Wang <
tse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sounds good. OAuth should work here.
>
> > I think another thing to watch out is that any relationship imported
> > from an ODD document should require the same confirmation as an
> > ordinary "Add Friend" in the social network. For instance, let's say
> > that LinkedIn and MySpace decide to implement OpenDD. LinkedIn
> > records the relationships as "connections." If MySpace decide simply
> > to import the connections relationships from LinkedIn without
> > confirmation, and your boss and you are connected in LinkedIn, your
> > boss can simply add you as a friend on MySpace by exporting the ODD
> > file from LinkedIn and importing it into MySpace. This very well may
> > not be desirable, depending on what you have put on MySpace.
>
> > Tom
>
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Chris Messina <
chris.mess...@gmail.com>