Maybe we should view this from a social networking/collaboration
point of view.
Over the last few year we developed a model called Load-Link-Share-
(Restrict)
For Laconica this means:
Load = a user post a notice
Link = #tag the notice to link it to related notices (and other
content using this tag)
Share = Share it with Communities and/or people
Restrict = restrict read/write/ admin ACL to groups and/or people
As you can see - we make a difference between a
Group = a collection of people used to apply ACL's
and
Communities = collection of groups and individual people
This model allow to apply any access control granularity needs you
might have
Example:
A community named laconica (id =:laconica) consists of
- Core member group with read and write ACL within their community
(group id = !laconica-MEMBERS)
- Group reviewer belongs to the community but only has read ACL
( group id = !laconica--Reviewers)
- Joe and Jim are individuals and have admin rights to administrate
the group (user name:@joe,@ jim)
In our implementation we have following tagging policy
Community tag = community:uniqueCommunityKey laconica
= :uniqueCommunityKey
Core Member group of a community = MEMBERS-uniqueCommunityKey
laconica =!uniqueCommunityKey
Associated groups: either uniqueCommunityKey-GroupName for related
groups managed by this community (laconica - !!uniqueCommunityKey-
GroupName or any other group name e.g. all-identi.ca-users
The beauty on this model is to
Plus
+ relates notices (and other content) via Tags
+ share with communities via Community Tag (in laconica it could
be :community)
+ granular ACL if needed based on groups e.g !Laconica or !Laconica-
Reviewers and individuals e.g @Jim
+ works across multiple laconica instances (and other social services
using the same convention)
Minus
- need explanation about the difference of a groups and communities
- need to enforce name conventions for groups .
- need to add Community identifier e.g :
- more complex than a simple group model.
Summary
@xxx = user
#xxx = tag
!xxx = group
:!xxx =community
:!xxx could consist of @xxx(admin), !xxx*read/write), !yyy(read)
If you are interested you can watch a short video which show how we
implemented the LLS model https://slx.sun.com/1179273037
for attachment sharing ...
Maybe this looks pretty complicated .. but this model satisfies the
main enterprise needs for open-secure social collaboration :-)
On Feb 8, 2009, at 4:07 AM, Mr. Meitar Moscovitz wrote:
On Feb 8, 2009, at 7:20 AM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
If we tried to make groups and tags the same thing, we would ruin
people's expectations of hash tags in order to make a bad version
of groups. I would prefer not to do either.
I should perhaps start by clarifying that I actually *like* groups,
a lot, and I like them even more after hearing some of Evan's plans
for how they will evolve with distinct features over time. I started
this discussion as a *response* to other people's concerns over the !
group/#tag issue, not any immediate ones of my own.
More specifically, I agree with Evan here when he says that trying
to make groups and tags the same thing would ruin people's
expectations of both. It's also why I didn't like Jaiku's notion of
overloading the hashtag to mean both tags *and* groups: different
functions should be designated by users explicitly.
I think there's an interesting problem with posting a notice to !
php with the tag #php. The question is one of addressing; are you
trying to address a group of people you belong to, or just trying
to mark a message with a topic (which may be interesting to that
group of people, or to others)?
That's precisely the question I had with regard to the large amount
of double-ups I see in group notices, but quickly resolved for
myself when I started to gain an (I hope correct) understanding of
the distinction between groups and tags. There are many imaginable
situations in which a notice to a group could logically contain a
tag of the same name. Some hypothetical examples:
!javascript #Opera's new #JavaScript #engine is called Carakan—
speedy and sexy!
If I were a machine, I might read this notice as: to JavaScript
group, about: Opera JavaScript engine. A less technical example:
!parents I have a son who wants to drop out of high #school. My
#parents thought me crazy, but I'm happy for my son!
Again as a machine: "this is a notice to the Parents group that is
about a member's parents and school."
While both of these notices are well under 140 characters so they
can accommodate a doubling of a tag and a group, which I think in
both of these examples is extremely reasonable, but of course
sometimes lots of people (myself included) have trouble fitting
everything we want to say into the 140-character limit. It is in
those situations only that I'd think to use one of those (admittedly
ugly looking) "banghash" contractions. (And they are just like
English-language contractions in the patch I explored it with: I'll
= I will, !#parents = !parents #parents)
I think the fact that so many of our current groups (like !ubuntu)
are related to particular topics makes this even more confusing,
but I think that as groups mature this will become less of an issue.
Very much agreed.
I'd be happy to add an additional tag for each group in a message,
so that "!php hello world" is automatically tagged with "php" and
will show up in the tag stream for that tag. That would at least
save people the trouble of having to add an extra hashtag.
-Evan
I'm not sure this is a good idea. As you say, so many of our current
groups (like !php) are about particular topics so this would
*probably* make sense for a group like that. I'm concerned that it
won't make sense for *all* groups *all* the time, however, and in
those situations getting automatically tagged could be a surprise to
more people than the other way around. Also, it might clutter a
legitimate stream of tagged notices. For instance:
!php Did you guys see Ramus's shoes?!? I like polka-dots, too!
This, clearly, is not a notice about PHP itself, but could very well
be something that is sent to the PHP group. In a case like that,
auto-tagging the notice would feel a little "the system went behind
my back" to me.
All of this, of course = just my 2¢.
Cheers,
-Meitar Moscovitz
Personal: http://maymay.net
Professional: http://MeitarMoscovitz.com
_______________________________________________
Laconica-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
_______________________________________________
Laconica-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
