Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
Ok. Here the very strange sounding proposal, but give it a second. What is really needed is a system that gives everything a UUID. People, accounts, messages, pictures etc. A namespace that connects WHAT I do (post noticesn take pictures) with WHO I am and what OTHERS can do with it. The internet of things as a sort of DNS where the perso or entity that creates it is the root. Whatever you discuss or plan should keep thisin mind IMHO. And yes, it makes anonymity problematic if not impossible, which is a security risk etc. But nevertheless - I am collecting input on such a fully individually owned, decentralized system. Call me crazy, if you want :-) Jan -- Jan H Wildeboer| EMEA Open Source Affairs | Office: +49 (0)89 205071-207 Red Hat GmbH | Mobile: +49 (0)174 33 23 249 Technopark II, Haus C | Fax:+49 (0)89 205071-111 Werner-von-Siemens-Ring 11 -15 | 85630 Grasbrunn| _ Reg. Adresse: Red Hat GmbH, Technopark II, Haus C, Werner-von-Siemens-Ring 11 -15 85630 Grasbrunn, Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 153243 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Brendan Lane, Charlie Peters, Michael Cunningham, Charles Cachera _ GPG Key: 3AC3C8AB Fingerprint: 3D1E C4E0 DD67 E16D E47A 9564 A72F 5C39 3AC3 C8AB - Original Message - From: laconica-dev-boun...@laconi.ca laconica-dev-boun...@laconi.ca To: laconica-dev@laconi.ca laconica-dev@laconi.ca Sent: Mon Sep 07 08:25:48 2009 Subject: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts Here's an idea. If I own these two accounts: http://identi.ca/tobyink http://example.com/tobyink Then I should be able to join them together. To join them together would be like a subscription, but would be bi-directional and require confirmation from both ends. Once joined, notices from http://example.com/tobyink would not just appear in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink/all but also in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink. People who subscribed to http://identi.ca/tobyink would also see notices from http://example.com/tobyink. (And vice versa of course.) This makes moving accounts easy - you just join your new account to your old account, then abandon the old one. Subscribers don't need to unsubscribe from the old account and subscribe to the new one. (Though the person moving accounts will need to re-add to all their old subscriptions to their new account.) Just an idea. What do others think? -- Toby A Inkster mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk http://tobyinkster.co.uk ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
On 8 Sep 2009, at 13:55, Jan Wildeboer wrote: Ok. Here the very strange sounding proposal, but give it a second. What you describe is essentially the Semantic Web. A lot of clever people are already working to make it a reality. What is really needed is a system that gives everything a UUID. People, accounts, messages, pictures etc. This is the only real difference between the Semantic Web and what you've described is that the Semantic Web doesn't use UUIDs but URIs. An advantage of URIs is that they offer a built-in resolution mechanism for retrieving a resource or information about it. The idea of the Semantic Web is to give things (People, accounts, documents, pictures, places, abstract concepts) URIs; and then use triples (thing, property, value) to describe them. e.g. if the URI http://tobyinkster.co.uk/#i represents the person, me; the URI http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage represents the concept of having a homepage; and http://tobyinkster.co.uk/ is my homepage; then the statement that I have a homepage can be represented using this triple: http://tobyinkster.co.uk/#i http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage http://tobyinkster.co.uk/ . There are already data models (such as RDF), file formats (RDF/XML, Turtle) and data query and manipulation protocols (SPARQL) available with plenty of implementations, but there's still also a lot of interesting work going on in this area. If this sounds like something you're interested in, the next step might be to read up at: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web -- Toby A Inkster mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk http://tobyinkster.co.uk ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
Sounds like a symbolic link? I wonder if this is a common case? And I also wonder if the PuSH model would be better here — where you might set up a series of listeners that just repost your content (as copies of the original)? I'm curious if you goal is to be able to publish/create content within both contexts or — to use the language of yore — if you'd rather setup up master/slave relationship? Finally, is this a common problem or just something that you'd like to have? Where might this situation show up in the wild? And when it does, would people want to copy ALL their posts, or just some? (Which I think could be a more interesting use case...) Chris On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Toby Inkster m...@tobyinkster.co.uk wrote: Here's an idea. If I own these two accounts: http://identi.ca/tobyink http://example.com/tobyink Then I should be able to join them together. To join them together would be like a subscription, but would be bi-directional and require confirmation from both ends. Once joined, notices from http://example.com/tobyink would not just appear in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink/all but also in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink. People who subscribed to http://identi.ca/tobyink would also see notices from http://example.com/tobyink. (And vice versa of course.) This makes moving accounts easy - you just join your new account to your old account, then abandon the old one. Subscribers don't need to unsubscribe from the old account and subscribe to the new one. (Though the person moving accounts will need to re-add to all their old subscriptions to their new account.) Just an idea. What do others think? -- Toby A Inkster mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk http://tobyinkster.co.uk ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev -- Chris Messina Open Web Advocate Personal: http://factoryjoe.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina Citizen Agency: http://citizenagency.com Diso Project: http://diso-project.org OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 09:10:07 -0700 Chris Messina chris.mess...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, okay, that's slight different then. It sounds like you're looking for the equivalent of HTTP 301 (permanent redirect)? Another useful case would be a merging account. ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
If you are talking about statusnet becoming part of this kind of idea? http://dashes.com/anil/2009/07/the-pushbutton-web-realtime-becomes- real.html Its probably because I am new to this, but the relationship between statusnet installs has always been very confusing for me... confusing because of the existence of twitter mainly. Creating a hub/app relationship (as per the diagram in the above post) with controls enabled at the hub for pubsubbing your content would be clearer for me. I guess laconi.ca has acted as the hub up till now? but that has not been a very appealing model to me. Perhaps contextualising the hubs also would help provide more useful content? Please correct me If I am talking crap here... Paul On 7 Sep 2009, at 16:36, Chris Messina wrote: Sounds like a symbolic link? I wonder if this is a common case? And I also wonder if the PuSH model would be better here — where you might set up a series of listeners that just repost your content (as copies of the original)? I'm curious if you goal is to be able to publish/create content within both contexts or — to use the language of yore — if you'd rather setup up master/slave relationship? Finally, is this a common problem or just something that you'd like to have? Where might this situation show up in the wild? And when it does, would people want to copy ALL their posts, or just some? (Which I think could be a more interesting use case...) Chris On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Toby Inkster m...@tobyinkster.co.uk wrote: Here's an idea. If I own these two accounts: http://identi.ca/tobyink http://example.com/tobyink Then I should be able to join them together. To join them together would be like a subscription, but would be bi-directional and require confirmation from both ends. Once joined, notices from http://example.com/tobyink would not just appear in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink/all but also in the notice stream at http://identi.ca/tobyink. People who subscribed to http://identi.ca/tobyink would also see notices from http://example.com/tobyink. (And vice versa of course.) This makes moving accounts easy - you just join your new account to your old account, then abandon the old one. Subscribers don't need to unsubscribe from the old account and subscribe to the new one. (Though the person moving accounts will need to re-add to all their old subscriptions to their new account.) Just an idea. What do others think? -- Toby A Inkster mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk http://tobyinkster.co.uk ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev -- Chris Messina Open Web Advocate Personal: http://factoryjoe.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina Citizen Agency: http://citizenagency.com Diso Project: http://diso-project.org OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
On 7 Sep 2009, at 16:36, Chris Messina wrote: I'm curious if you goal is to be able to publish/create content within both contexts or — to use the language of yore — if you'd rather setup up master/slave relationship? The relationship would be one between peers or equal status. Of course, the person joining the accounts together might just want to post messages just to one and treat the other as a slave. I don't use Twitter, but I think this is conceptually similar to the Twitter bridge, but between two StatusNet instances rather than Twitter and one StatusNet instance. As each side would be a StatusNet instance though, we should be able to offer tighter, better, more reliable integration. Finally, is this a common problem or just something that you'd like to have? Where might this situation show up in the wild? And when it does, would people want to copy ALL their posts, or just some? (Which I think could be a more interesting use case...) Other people can probably come up with other use cases. Moving accounts is just one of them. Another reason would be network resilience - not relying on a single point of failure. If identi.ca goes down, I can keep posting to example.com and hopefully (not sure of the details of the OMB spec in this area), identi.ca would pick up my messages when it resurfaced. Lastly, I think it would be nice for this to be possible just for architectural reasons: StatusNet is supposed to be about decentralising microblogging; accounts shouldn't be tied to a single server. -- Toby A Inkster mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk http://tobyinkster.co.uk ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
Re: [StatusNet-dev] Joined up accounts
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Toby Inkster m...@tobyinkster.co.ukwrote: Lastly, I think it would be nice for this to be possible just for architectural reasons: StatusNet is supposed to be about decentralising microblogging; accounts shouldn't be tied to a single server. Yeah, I agree. It seems to me that using the PubSubHubBub (PuSH) approach would work — and would follow what's emerging in the industry as a reasonable mechanism to achieve this cross-posting situation that you're describing. Metaphorically, we'd end up with something more like this: ln -s ch...@status.net ch...@twitter.com In other words, creating equivalency between two nodes/users in two separate services. I think it's important and useful to use the email-style identifier format in this situation, even though both could be expanded to their URL equivalents (http://status.net/chris and http://twitter.com/chris). I would worry about creating confusion, however — if people discovered one or the other accounts and began replying to either one. Would their comments/replies need to be synced across contexts as well? Chris -- Chris Messina Open Web Advocate Personal: http://factoryjoe.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina Citizen Agency: http://citizenagency.com Diso Project: http://diso-project.org OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ Laconica-dev mailing list Laconica-dev@laconi.ca http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
