Actually I'm more than willing to bet that most enterprise setups will be
gun shy about having waves be automatically public, as will many users.

Personally I like the model GWave has at the moment:

- Start wave, add content
- Add those participants you want
- If you want to go public add the required participant

Be that as it may, might it be an option for WIAB to allow the admin/user to
set whether automatic public or not is the desired result?

James

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Wim <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 3/12/2010 11:14 a.m., STenyaK wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 22:25, Ian Roughley<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>
>>> Novell Vibe has default public / feed "waves" and it's not been a problem
>>> so far with the
>>> enterprise.
>>>
>>
>> Vibe is more like a support forum than a private enterprise mailing
>> list, from what I've experienced. In that case, default public is more
>> suitable.
>>
>> But it brings an interesting point, which to be honest, I have never
>> really given much thought. I'm not even sure how it works:
>> How does "public" work? Is there one "public" for each wave server?
>> Can I search for public waves at any server I desire? Is this "public"
>> user/group federated by default, meaning I can search
>> [email protected] (or whatever), and find all their internal
>> waves even if I don't have an account there? (which I probably
>> shouldn't need, just like I don't need a hotmail account in order to
>> read emails sent from there). Is there any global "public" user/group,
>> so that I can search for any wave in the world, or do I have to
>> manually search through all the "public" users/groups that I know
>> (with:[email protected] <with%[email protected]> OR
>> with:[email protected] <with%[email protected]> OR
>> with:[email protected]<with%[email protected]>
>> )?
>>
>
> I think this depends on which "public" you are using.  Because the
> federation protocol has no knowledge of groups etc. it will also have no
> knowledge of "public".  Different servers can have their own definition(s)
> of "public".  In fact "public" will likely be implemented as a group that
> just always say "yes, that user is a part of me" whenever it is queried.  At
> least that is my understanding of how public works currently.
>
> For example an enterprises server might have a "internal public" where
> anyone with an account on that server can access the wave and a separate
> "external public" where anyone with a link to that wave (either found on the
> internet or some kind of federated search) can add themselves to it.  This
> server could default all their waves to "internal public" to allow others
> within the company to reply if they feel they could contribute while still
> ensuring their internal correspondence is kept internal.
>
> --
> Wim
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Wave Protocol" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<wave-protocol%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave 
Protocol" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.

Reply via email to