Comments on: Hosted lifebits meets infobus http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/ Strategies for Internet citizens Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:48:27 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: CameronNeylon.Net » Blog Archive » Pub-sub/syndication patterns and post publication peer review http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-131235 CameronNeylon.Net » Blog Archive » Pub-sub/syndication patterns and post publication peer review Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:31:02 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-131235 [...] In a sense, when the Web 2.0 world was built it was got nearly precisely wrong for personal content. For me Jon Udell has written most clearly about this when he talks about the publish-subscribe pattern for successful frameworks. In essence I publish my content and you choose to subscribe to it. This works well for me, the blogger, at this site, but it is not so great for the commenter who has to leave their comment to my tender mercies on my site. It would be better if the commenter could publish their comment and I could syndicate it back to my blog. This creates all sorts of problems; it is challenging for you to aggregate your own comments together and you have to rely on the functionality of specific sites to help you follow responses to your comments. Jon wrote about this better than I can in his blog post. [...] [...] In a sense, when the Web 2.0 world was built it was got nearly precisely wrong for personal content. For me Jon Udell has written most clearly about this when he talks about the publish-subscribe pattern for successful frameworks. In essence I publish my content and you choose to subscribe to it. This works well for me, the blogger, at this site, but it is not so great for the commenter who has to leave their comment to my tender mercies on my site. It would be better if the commenter could publish their comment and I could syndicate it back to my blog. This creates all sorts of problems; it is challenging for you to aggregate your own comments together and you have to rely on the functionality of specific sites to help you follow responses to your comments. Jon wrote about this better than I can in his blog post. [...]

]]> By: Seb http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-128911 Seb Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:23:48 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-128911 Leaving this comment in your blog's care, partly for my future reference ... 1) Backtype does a nice job of automagically gathering copies of the comments I leave on various blogs: http://www.backtype.com/sebpaquet It features (local) revocation and fake/spam marking. It links to the original conversations; sadly but obviously, that link is one-way. 2) I haven't seen anyone do it, but one way to get pretty close to what you describe, by hand, would be to start a "comment blog" and dual-post every comment there, making sure to include reciprocal links. Somewhat tedious... Leaving this comment in your blog’s care, partly for my future reference …

1) Backtype does a nice job of automagically gathering copies of the comments I leave on various blogs: http://www.backtype.com/sebpaquet

It features (local) revocation and fake/spam marking. It links to the original conversations; sadly but obviously, that link is one-way.

2) I haven’t seen anyone do it, but one way to get pretty close to what you describe, by hand, would be to start a “comment blog” and dual-post every comment there, making sure to include reciprocal links. Somewhat tedious…

]]> By: Science in the open » Pub-sub/syndication patterns and post publication peer review http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-128514 Science in the open » Pub-sub/syndication patterns and post publication peer review Sat, 20 Jun 2009 18:35:03 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-128514 [...] In a sense, when the Web 2.0 world was built it was got nearly precisely wrong for personal content. For me Jon Udell has written most clearly about this when he talks about the publish-subscribe pattern for successful frameworks. In essence I publish my content and you choose to subscribe to it. This works well for me, the blogger, at this site, but it is not so great for the commenter who has to leave their comment to my tender mercies on my site. It would be better if the commenter could publish their comment and I could syndicate it back to my blog. This creates all sorts of problems; it is challenging for you to aggregate your own comments together and you have to rely on the functionality of specific sites to help you follow responses to your comments. Jon wrote about this better than I can in his blog post. [...] [...] In a sense, when the Web 2.0 world was built it was got nearly precisely wrong for personal content. For me Jon Udell has written most clearly about this when he talks about the publish-subscribe pattern for successful frameworks. In essence I publish my content and you choose to subscribe to it. This works well for me, the blogger, at this site, but it is not so great for the commenter who has to leave their comment to my tender mercies on my site. It would be better if the commenter could publish their comment and I could syndicate it back to my blog. This creates all sorts of problems; it is challenging for you to aggregate your own comments together and you have to rely on the functionality of specific sites to help you follow responses to your comments. Jon wrote about this better than I can in his blog post. [...]

]]> By: Jim Yates http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-126918 Jim Yates Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:43:47 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-126918 ehud says, "...Interesting discussion. One nitpick: Not all information is the same. I don’t think the analogy between a comment made in the context of a discussion and medical records hold. ..." I agree and this is very very important. Who is the owner of the information. What are the conditions surrounding the information has to be taken into account. It is not clear that you (Jon) are the owner of the X-ray (probably not the physical X-ray just the part that it is of your body - complex stuff). Consider Music you have bought on CD (you, of course, do not get files from your friends ;-) ). It has a copyright agreement associated with it that must be properly handled in any transfer. While I believe that the Twitter type of activity has some value I do not think that it is game-changing. There is a lot more to this area than has even begun to be thought about let alone executed in code. ehud says, “…Interesting discussion. One nitpick: Not all information is the same. I don’t think the analogy between a comment made in the context of a discussion and medical records hold. …”
I agree and this is very very important. Who is the owner of the information. What are the conditions surrounding the information has to be taken into account. It is not clear that you (Jon) are the owner of the X-ray (probably not the physical X-ray just the part that it is of your body – complex stuff). Consider Music you have bought on CD (you, of course, do not get files from your friends ;-) ). It has a copyright agreement associated with it that must be properly handled in any transfer.
While I believe that the Twitter type of activity has some value I do not think that it is game-changing. There is a lot more to this area than has even begun to be thought about let alone executed in code.

]]> By: Jon Udell http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-126910 Jon Udell Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:10:33 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-126910 > Whether this is the right model for > social activities such (like discussion > threads), I am not sure. There is no singular right model, but it is /a/ right model. Example why: My conversation with Timo Hannay at Nature Publishing. http://blog.jonudell.net/2007/07/06/a-conversation-with-timo-hannay-about-the-scientific-web/ The issue here: Scientists would collaborate better, and science would advance faster, if scientists could participate more freely in loosely-coupled online discussion: blogging, commenting on other blogs, etc. Many still don't, and observers closer to that scene than me invariably report that it's partly because they can't take credit for contributions in that realm, or measure the influence that accrues to them from such contributions. The architecture I'm proposing would support measurement of contribution and influence, so that scientists could more easily justify contributing to, and influencing, a loosely-coupled network. > Whether this is the right model for
> social activities such (like discussion
> threads), I am not sure.

There is no singular right model, but it is /a/ right model. Example why: My conversation with Timo Hannay at Nature Publishing.

http://blog.jonudell.net/2007/07/06/a-conversation-with-timo-hannay-about-the-scientific-web/

The issue here: Scientists would collaborate better, and science would advance faster, if scientists could participate more freely in loosely-coupled online discussion: blogging, commenting on other blogs, etc.

Many still don’t, and observers closer to that scene than me invariably report that it’s partly because they can’t take credit for contributions in that realm, or measure the influence that accrues to them from such contributions.

The architecture I’m proposing would support measurement of contribution and influence, so that scientists could more easily justify contributing to, and influencing, a loosely-coupled network.

]]> By: Ehud http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-126905 Ehud Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:22:22 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-126905 Interesting discussion. One nitpick: Not all information is the same. I don't think the analogy between a comment made in the context of a discussion and medical records hold. We want to be able to revoke, withdraw etc. for the latter, you are damn right that the architecture should support this. Whether this is the right model for social activities such (like discussion threads), I am not sure. Interesting discussion. One nitpick: Not all information is the same. I don’t think the analogy between a comment made in the context of a discussion and medical records hold. We want to be able to revoke, withdraw etc. for the latter, you are damn right that the architecture should support this. Whether this is the right model for social activities such (like discussion threads), I am not sure.

]]> By: Mitch Garnaat http://blog.jonudell.net/2009/03/06/hosted-lifebits-meets-infobus/#comment-126900 Mitch Garnaat Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:42:52 +0000 http://blog.jonudell.net/?p=1215#comment-126900 Another interesting article. I love this topic! I think you are on the right track in asserting that the lifebits service is more about providing clarity of ownership and syndication than trying to enforce it. True enforcement would lead you down an RIAA rathole that would just irritate people and provide no real value. Clear communication of your intent regarding your content will achieve the desired affect in the vast majority of situations. Mitch Another interesting article. I love this topic! I think you are on the right track in asserting that the lifebits service is more about providing clarity of ownership and syndication than trying to enforce it. True enforcement would lead you down an RIAA rathole that would just irritate people and provide no real value. Clear communication of your intent regarding your content will achieve the desired affect in the vast majority of situations.

Mitch

]]>