Socialwg/Social API/User stories

CLOSED. No new user stories, please!

Please:

do not add new stories.
- If you do have more stories to contribute, you may collect them in: Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories for potential consideration after the first iteration on a Social API.
do not delete or modify stories.
do not add hierarchical structure or alternate flows within major themes. Make those separate stories.
do not add numbers, letters, or other codes to the user stories.
add comments or discussion at the end of the user story.
add +1/+0/0/-0/-1 survey results to each story you find interesting.
- +1 "yes, I need it, will implement, worth doing"
- +0 "I'm kind of for it, but can live without it"
- 0 "I really don't care about it"
- -0 "I'm kind of against it, but can live with it"
- -1 "out of scope" or "does not belong in first version so we can ship sooner than later" (provide an explanation)
type ~~~~ to automatically add your name and timestamp
do not feel like you need to respond to every user story. There are a lot.
do not rename stories! it will break links pointing to them from groupings.
VOTING ENDS AT MIDNIGHT EST TUESDAY NIGHT[1]
- 2015-02-24 21:00:00 -0800
- 2015-02-25 00:00:00 -0500
- 2015-02-25 05:00:00 +0000

You should assume that all of these stories are independent of network topologies: the stories should work whether all the actors have accounts on a single server, on different servers, and independently of where the data is located.

Sorting of user stories by votes can be found at Socialwg/Social_API/Sorting_user_stories

Approved user stories

SWAT0

User posts a note

Eric writes a short note to be shared with his followers.
After posting the note, he notices a spelling error. He edits the note and re-posts it.
Later, Eric decides that the information in the note is incorrect. He deletes the note.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. This is core. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Already doing this on my site. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 1:05, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+1 Assume that the 'following' and corresponding notification is the key social aspect here Bill Looby 22:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Have implemented this on my site and using since 2012 -- Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 have implemented on my site since 2010-01-01[2] Tantek Çelik (talk) 06:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 have implemented on my site Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 have implemented on my site Amy Guy (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 implemented on personal site in 2013 --Bret Comnes (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Reading a user's recent posts

Iris finds a comment by Sam on one of her photos funny. She'd like to read more posts by Sam.
Iris reads the latest notes by Sam. She also reviews his latest photos.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. I can't imagine a social API that doesn't support this. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 1:21, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 this is missing the mechanism of getting to Sam, which is a url click on his comment. Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

For an API? There are a million ways this could happen. "Siri, read me the latest updates by this commenter." --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Following a person

Delano meets Beth at a company meeting. They are both user interface designers. He finds her ideas interesting.
Delano follows Beth on their company social network.
Beth posts a photo from a whiteboarding session at a company retreat.
Delano sees the photo in his inbox stream.
Ted, Delano's coworker, wants to find new people to follow. He looks at the list of people that Delano follows. He finds Beth in the list, reads her stream, enjoys it, and decides to follow her, too.
Beth posts frequently. Delano is having a hard time reading his inbox stream because Beth's activities drown out everyone else's. He stops following Beth.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. Hard to think of software as 'social' without a follow mechanism. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 1:21, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 The language "on their company social network" seems unnecessary. I would also add that Delano should not be required to publish his following list. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 public following lists are handy though xfn since 2003 on my sites Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This is an expected feature at this point. I want the option to NOT publish a list of people I follow to the public/people I follow however. --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 same caveats as aaronpk, "company social network" too detailed, and public following list should not be required. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Read Social Stream

Jake is bored at work. He checks his social inbox stream to see what his friends, family, and coworkers are up to.
Jake sees in his social stream a note by Tammy about her new apartment. Tammy is his friend.
Jake sees in his social stream a photo by Edith from her concert last night. Jake follows Edith but Edith doesn't know Jake. Edith has thousands of followers.
Jake sees in his social stream a video from Damon. Damon and Jake are both in the "Boxing Fans" group. Damon posted the video to the group.
Jake sees in his social stream a sound file from Carol. Carol is Jake's wife. The sound file is a reminder to stop for groceries after work. Carol posted the sound file only for Jake.
Jake sees in his social stream that his friend Tammy has added a new friend, Denise. Jake remembers Denise from high school. Jake requests to add Denise as a friend, too.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. Really, very core. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 02:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This is what the IndieWeb community has been calling a "reader", of which there are now several working prototypes built. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 this isa reader, but could just be email Kevin Marks (talk) 11:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I prefer stream terminology to inbox ;) --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Saying "Jake's stream" is confusing, since it could mean "activities that Jake did" or "activities that people that Jake follows did". --Evan Prodromou (talk) 14:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 if interpreted as "reading who you follow". Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 I dislike the inbox phrasing / framing / and expectations. Social Web is not Email.

Integration : Adding recommendations to bespoke software

{simple facebook example - but I think it needs calling out as a 3rd party usable service}

James maintains an application for managing architectural designs
Maggie, a senior architect would like to recommend many of the better designs
James uses an existing liking service which allows him to post any recommendations, to provide this
This service also allows James to present existing likes for the design in question
Maggie gets to like specific designs, and her followers see these as do viewers of these designs
James achieves this with a simple inclusion on the associated web page, but could have chosen a more detailed integration if greater control was needed over the user interface

From Bill Looby

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - We use this "widget" approach to make social capability easily accessible to other systems. Adam Boyet (talk) 06:52, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Integration : Adding comments to bespoke software

Maria, an IT Architect, has been tasked with encouraging better collaboration on the development of her companies Industrial Processes
As these processes are tightly controlled (though generally visible) an associated discussion and evangelisation capability is required
Maria integrates with an existing comment capability to store and retrieve comments rather than redeveloping
May-Ling sees the comment area with the Processes and suggests changes, as she herself does not have rights to update
The process owner gets a notification that someone has commented on this Process
Followers of both the Process owner and May-Ling will see this comment event
Maria achieves this with a simple inclusion on the associated web page, but could have chosen a more detailed integration if greater control was needed over the user interface

From Bill Looby

+1. But I think the "simple inclusion" is a pain. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:39, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - We use this "widget" approach to make social capability easily accessible to other systems. Adam Boyet (talk) 06:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 same caveat as Evan Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Direct Messaging

Kyle wants to tell Lisa something privately.
Kyle sends her a message that no one else can view.
Lisa is notified she has a message.
Lisa reads the message and responds privately.

From Ben Roberts originally posted on ben.thatmustbe.me

+1 — Ben Roberts (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Could this also be generalised to post + access control + notification? Amy Guy (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This isn't used as much within the enterprise, as it is in public. Still, seems valuable. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:33, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed user stories

User profile management

Kim creates a personal profile with her name, avatar picture, and home town.
Kim updates her profile to include her job title, phone number and company name.
Kim reconsiders her personal privacy boundaries; she updates her profile to remove her phone number.

From: Evan Prodromou

+1. This is core functionality that all social software provides. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 12:42, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 22:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I've done this on my own site Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I think most of this is core, but not all. For example the following portions are not core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 06:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 "home town", e.g. neither Twitter nor Instagram have this, it's unnecessary
-1 "job title", same, neither Tw nor IG have it, don't need it
-1 "company name", same, neither Tw nor IG have it, don't need it
-0 "phone number", minus (-) for same reason (neither Tw nor IG have public phone number), but "0" because clearly something was needed to illustrate profile

Tantek Çelik would Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories#User_profile_management_V2 sufficiently clear things up for you? Benjamin Roberts (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

editing.

+1 with the assumption that the specific profile data is arbitrary, and those given are just examples Amy Guy (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 On the profile, but I don't want a specific set of profile data --Bret Comnes (talk) 16:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

User posts a note with embedded media

Samantha is writing a post directed at her students about how to get started in programming Lovelace, and she had seen her friend Helen's video recently
Below the first paragraph, Samantha embeds Helen's video, then writes several more paragraphs on how to apply those concepts to their first homework assignment.

From: Jessica Tallon and Christopher Allan Webber

+0. Many social networks don't control position of embedded items, only those with more advanced editing UI. Facebook, Twitter, G+ do not do this, you only share a video/photo/etc. I do however do this on my site, but only through web interface and a more advanced editor . — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 1:21, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+0 This can become a very complicated story very quickly (aggregation of events, mixed authorship . . . ). Even if not prioritised, this is a good story for validating any approach Bill Looby 22:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Not a +1 because the video must be in a specific location within the text. -- Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0, same concern as Aaronpk's — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Well, I suppose if using HTML markup, maybe the specific location is not required. Would we be interested in making an adjustment where this is more about an attachment/enclosure? Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Still believe specific position is desriable but if unfeasible, as an attachment would be OK. Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 / -1 based on question. Tantek Çelik (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 if video embedding is purely via user entering a URL for the video as plain text where they want it embedded, and then video is embedded automatically by the client, then yes, and I have implemented this for years on my site.
-1 if video embedding involves uploading the video, and then picking a specific spot for it in content. No popular network does this, definitely not core, nor needed for v1.

+1 I've been embedding video in my sites since 2001 Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 with the reading that the video embedded is already hosted somewhere, not uploaded as part of the post. But also would be good if you could upload your video to one server and embed it in a post on a different server simultaneously. Amy Guy (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 To the title, but the story implies unwanted restrictions. This might turn into a vector for ad insertion. --Bret Comnes (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

User posts a file

Maria uploads a photo of her car and shares it with her friends.
Maria decides that the picture is too big and crops it to just show the car. She uploads a new version to replace the original.
Maria realizes the photo includes her license plate number, which she would rather not share for privacy reasons. She deletes the photo.

From: Evan Prodromou

+1. This is core. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Though this is really a case of a photo share which could be slightly different than a file (embedded vs download link) — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - We think there is slight confusion between the user story title and the actual details. Using a photo within the steps brings to mind "embedded media" (e.g. flickr) but the title brings to mind a simple file attachment (e.g. word document). Adam Boyet (talk) 1:21, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I would assume this would result in inline viewing of the file (photo, video, audio) but that is more a UI problem. I've been posting photos to my site using Micropub since 2014-03 -- Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 But I have problems with "too big" and "crops it to just show the car" if that requires standard sizes. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 / -1 depending on if photo/media-specific, or "any file".

+1 posting a photo already part of SWAT0, and something I intend to implement, even if via a service like ownyourgram.
-0 cropping a photo does not need to be part of the API, perhaps just UI of client code/engine.
-1 if this means any "file", then this is not core and must not be in v1.
+1 I've been posting photos to my sites since 1995 Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 intend to implement including file attachments with posts on my own site (not the cropping, that sounds like it happens out of band anyway) Amy Guy (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 partially implemented on persona site --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Managed profiles

All students going to a school or university or every employee of a company get a profile page
Some data there they cannot edit ( e.g. name, photo, class ), some elements they can ( e.g.. interests )
After authenticating to the system the student can change his interests, add links to his other external identities if he wishes, change his telephone number ( requires verification... )
The student can also specify how public their information can be - should the profile picture and name, only be visible to university staff and students, or only to other universities, or be completely public?
Human Resources on the other hand can edit key identifying information about their employee, student, ....

From User:Bblfish. This seems almost identical to the "#Employee directory" user story. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I think this only matters for giving appropriate error codes when someone tries to update their profile through the API. Or should the API allow someone besides the user to update their profile? I think that's probably a pain and should be handled by the backend store (like a directory system). --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Only being able to edit certain parts seems like a customization within a company, not something part of the API. I do like the ability to specify privacy per data. This is the standard now in FB and Google+ — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - We support the idea of managed profiles as we have both corporate- and user-managed data. The API does not care who is doing the updating (e.g. HR vs User). The authorization check enforces who can perform the update. Adam Boyet (talk) 1:51, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:14:00-7:00

+0 Agree with Ben. This story is mostly about data and policy rather than API. Another good one for validation though. Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Agree with Ben Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 -- Henry Story This is going to be important for a vast number of use cases. At the simplest it just requires the ability to split data across a number of files each with different access control rules

0 Conflicted: Agree with Ben, but will things become tricky if we don't know how to handle this case? Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I see the use case but Ben brings up good points. This seems complex and unsure if it's useful to be in at the API level Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 A requirement in many organizations Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 profile consolidation via rel-me links a better solution than complex permissions Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Authentication out of scope (what Adam said "API does not care who is doing the updating") but yes to data-specific access control Amy Guy (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I would hope this social API could reference my primary profile data, if I have one and I choose to reference it.--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 such hierarchical permissions control out of scope for v1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Organizing content

John records himself playing a song.
He creates a folder called "Me on guitar".
He adds the recording to that folder.
Erica looks at John's list of folders. She finds "Me on tuba", "Singing in the shower", and "Me on guitar".
Erica looks at all the song files in "Me on guitar". She downloads and listens to John's song.
John realizes he was actually playing the tuba, not the guitar. He removes the song from "Me on guitar" and adds it to "Me on tuba".
John realizes he doesn't play guitar at all. He deletes the "Me on guitar" folder.

From: Evan Prodromou

+1. This is a little complicated, but I managed it in pump.io using the add/remove verbs plus collections. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. I like being able to change grouping of files. But the use of Folders forces a structure, I think its better with tagging, same idea but tagging give more freedom to tag with multiple tags and thus be in multiple "folders". It also prevents issues of breaking links when you change folders. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 2:03, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 but with "tags" instead of "folders". I've been tagging content on my site since 2012 ([3], [4]) — Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 In diaspora* we are planning to use tags to organize photos into albums. --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 is John an ambien user? +1 for tags not folders been using them for >10 years Kevin Marks (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Authentication out of scope (what Adam said "API does not care who is doing the updating") but yes to data-specific access control Amy Guy (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 tags not folders, I use tags on my site Amy Guy (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 for tagging content and collections--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 if folders interpreted as tags. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Adding friends

Jeremy finds the profile for his roommate Tammy. He requests to add her as a friend.
Tammy approves Jeremy's request.
Tammy posts a photo of her dog. Jeremy sees the photo in his inbox stream.
Jeremy shares Ming's video. Tammy sees the video in her inbox stream.
Ike wants to know who Tammy knows. He looks at her friends list. He sees her friends, including Jeremy.
Tammy and Jeremy have a fight. Tammy moves out of the apartment. She unfriends Jeremy.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. pump.io doesn't have two-way friending, but it should. I'll implement this. Note that supporting both 'friend' and 'follow' is a little confusing for users; most social networks support one or the other but not both. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I prefer one-way following, "friending" is usually just a set of lower level operations (follow each other and add each other to contacts) — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 - We support the idea of both symmetrical (bi-directional) and asymmetrical (uni-directional) relationships. We actually have 2 different types of symmetrical relationships. One is a "normal" bi-directional relationship while the other is a mentoring relationship. :+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 2:11, Saturday, February 21, 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00 - This needs to be more generalized. Symmetric direct connections in general.

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Not sure whether to +1 or +0 this. I support the idea of requesting to read private content from a user. However I think the two-way friending aspect is unnecessary, as really that is just either two requests to read private content, or one private request and one regular follow action. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 02:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 on the assumption that following would also be supported, not just two-way friendships. These are both common and valid cases.--Jason Robinson (talk) 06:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Re: two-way friend: not sure this is an API requirement, seems the two-way friend can be handled as an implementation building on the rest of this, but agree it should be feasible Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Unsure both how valuable it is and if it's really something to do at the API level. Also does Tammy unfriending Jeremy stop Jeremy following Tammy (so he'd get objects shared to Public or those Following her?) Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC) but 'approving' could mean:

Tammy says "yes Jeremy can follow me" (eg. protected twitter accounts - maybe this happens via whatever access control solution is)
Tammy says "yes Jeremy can follow me and I'd also like to follow Jeremy" (eg. bidirectional facebook friending, but I think bidirectional is just an extension of monodirectional; 'approving' a request here is just sending back a monodirectional request that UI can make feel bidirectional if it chooses. Plus the access control, which can later be refined/revoked as on facebook).
Note: YouTube used to have friending *and* following (subscribing) as seperate actions but now only has following; maybe finding out why would be interesting.

+0 It seems like privacy groups and content subscriptions are conflated --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 with caveat that friends lists should not be required to be public. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Groups

Roger creates a group for his neighbours called "Canyon Street Neighbours".
Roger edits the group to include a description of its goals: "Getting to know each other". He also adds an avatar picture showing the view down the middle of the street.
Roger invites his neighbours Edna, Damon, Phyllis and Carlos to join the group.
Edna, Carlos and Damon join the group.
Edna posts a photo of trashcans on the sidewalk with the caption "Let's keep these at least 5 feet from the curb, please!"
Damon sees the photo in his inbox stream.
Carlos looks at the list of posts to the group. He sees Edna's photo in the list.
Damon looks at the list of members of the group. He sees himself, Edna, Carlos and Roger.
Tammy looks at the list of groups Carlos is a member of. She sees the "Canyon Street Neighbours" group, among others.
Damon and Carlos have angry arguments that are posted to the group. Edna tires of the drama and leaves the group.
Roger decides the group is hurting the neighbourhood, not helping it. He deletes the group.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. Complicated, but we did it for status.net. I have code for it in pump.io, using join/leave and so on. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Definitely complex when distributed, but groups is pretty common functionality. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:18:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Agreed that groups are necessary, but would be okay with not including it in the first version. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 And totally ok with not being in the first version --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Roger being able to delete the others' posts is problematic Kevin Marks (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 but also what Kevin said; perhaps the posts are attached to the users who made them, not the group itself, and it's just the aggregation of these posts that disappears rather than the posts themselves? In which case a group is a collection of users plus a collection of selected posts. Amy Guy (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)\

+0 I like the idea but don't have plans to implement anytime soon--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 I find this useful, but not for a v1 core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Contact lists

Jill creates a list of people she knows well, called "Close friends".
Jill adds Tammy, Carlos, Ike and Jeremy to her "Close friends" list. None of the friends know each other.
Jill looks at the list of people in her "Close friends" list. She reconsiders and removes Carlos from her "Close friends" list. They are friends, but not close.
Jill posts a note to her "Close friends" list. "I wanted to let you know that my husband Bill and I are separating."
Tammy, Ike and Jeremy see Jill's note in their inbox streams.
Jill looks at her list of contact lists. She sees "Close friends", "Family", "Coworkers", and "School play 2011".
Jill deletes the "School play 2011" list because she no longer uses it.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. In pump.io, contact lists are just collections of people. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Would this be like starting a group message (all other can see who received message), starting a bunch of direct messages? I'm assuming no one outside of those selected would be able to see these. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. We do this. Not sure if necessary for first version. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Plus one for the contacts list, Plus zero for the multiple lists Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 I have found contact lists to be too much effort to maintain, and instead post content to specific people or within specific groups. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Not sure how a contact list is different from a group? Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Is this access control plus a UI for helping Jill sort her connections? I presume Jill creates her list from people who *follow her* (ie have already agreed to see her content), not from people *she* follows but may not follow her back? Amy Guy (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 I find this useful, but not for a v1 core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Responses

Alexa posts a short video which is distributed to the inbox streams of her followers.
Ben thinks it's a good video. He indicates to Alexa and others that he "likes" the video.
Charles posts a comment on the video. "This is hilarious!"
Denise indicates that she "likes" Charles's comment.
Edgar post a comment on the video: "This sucks! Boo!" He thinks better of the sentiment and deletes the comment.
Felicia indicates that she "likes" the video. She watches again and realizes that Alexa is making some pretty mean jokes about another friend. She indicates that she doesn't, actually, "like" the video.
Ginny shares the video with her own followers. "Check out this great video by my friend Alexa!"

From Evan Prodromou

+1. This is pretty core. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Already doing parts of this, would like to get the rest done. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I am currently able to do all of this from my website, and would like to fill out the Micropub spec to support each action. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 this fits with micropub/webmentions as implemented Kevin Marks (talk) 11:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Collecting and displaying feedback on posts is huge.--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Would use this functionality, would be ok with leaving out video upload in v1 core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Extensible activity types

Helen tries a new social game called "Monkeyshines". She shares her social API credentials and endpoint information with the application.
Helen plays Monkeyshines. In the game, she collects 100 bananas, which is a new personal high score.
The game asks if she'd like to share this information with her social network. She agrees.
Her followers on the social network are notified that Helen collected 100 bananas.
Isaac looks at Helen's recent activities. He sees that she has posted several photos, shared a nacho recipe by a friend, and has collected 100 bananas.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. This is a good hedge for most other user stories; it lets us handle interesting processes with different activity types. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:26, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Does not seem necessary for a first version, since a reasonable fallback could be to post a text note instead. In any case, a plain text fallback should be part of this so consumers that don't recognize the custom type can display something. This is based on my implementation of posting "food" posts of what I eat and drink on my website. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is usually a low value use case. A text version is fine Kevin Marks (talk) 11:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Falling back to a text post (maybe with a link to the game or whatever) seems fine. Amy Guy (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Can be used for good and evil. Most of the time this kind of thing seems like apps posting advertising to social posts, but could assist with embedding media.--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Extensibility like this usually results in less interop per AS1 experience. I think we should do v1 without it.

Person tagging

Eric sees a photo posted by Dora from a recent event
Eric recognizes their mutual friend Cassie in the photo
Eric tags Cassie in the photo with the specific location of Cassie's face in the photo
Dora sees Eric's person-tag but realizes he tagged the wrong Cassie, so she corrects the tag to the correct Cassie
Cassie sees the photo and decides she would rather not be tagged in a photo of her holding a bottle of beer, so she removes the tag

From: aaronpk inspired by tantek

+1. Lots of difficult stuff in there, though. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Have been working on implementing this. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 - From an enterprise perspective we do not do this for security and privacy reasons. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:31, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 This is more accurately 'Object taging with Person' which to my mind is a lesser requirement than simple social user tagging (a la LinkedIn)Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I plan to implement this — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 The user story does nothing to mention that user should accept the tag before it is shown to anyone. Very bad for user privacy. --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story The story is worth keeping for the discussion on privacy features. Can all of the privacy requirements of a centralised social network be kept in a distributed one? Should the owner of the photo rather reduce the visibility of the photo? In a decentralised network where nobody has a full view over all the information is tagging someone as problematic as when all the information is on a centralised network where one actor can track every information? What are the issues with tagging people in centralised social networks exactly? ( it may be that the problem is more todo with the notification system )

+0 I'm not wild about person tagging in photos as a story, but there should be ways in the API to notify someone participates, so I guess I agree Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 In the current state this seems a huge privacy invasion. I don't want to constantly be untagging myself in photos. Tagging should be opt-in by the person being tagged. Jessica Tallon (talk

) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I would assume the acceptance of the tag would be an implementation detail. You could not implement, just ignore all location tags, etc. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 04:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 But preventing privacy and security problems is necessary. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Assuming approval of tag by user tagged. Could do person tagging on a text post too, no need for photo (facebook does this). Amy Guy (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Anyone can write my name by a photo, but they should not automatically get to insert that into the streams that I publish to followers. --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

To see if I can alleviate some of the issues people have with this story I created Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories#Person_Tagging_V2 which incorporates the ability to disable all tagging of oneself by others. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Location tagging

Cassie receives a notification that she has been tagged in a photo posted by Dora
Cassie views the photo and recognizes the photo was taken at Starbucks, so adds the location of the photo
Dora sees that Cassie added the location, but notices she tagged the wrong Starbucks, so she updates the location to the correct Starbucks
Dora later reflects on the photo and realizes she doesn't want to admit to having drank a coffee from Starbucks, so she removes the location tag from the photo

From: aaronpk inspired by tantek

+1. Sure. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 - From an enterprise perspective we do not do this for security and privacy reasons. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00 ... tagging in general... doesn't matter what is tagged (user, location, etc)

+0 Specific tagging of an Object with a location (as opposed to a generic text tag) would not be a priority for us Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I currently tag my own posts with a location, and plan to support other people adding (or suggesting) locations for my posts — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 The user story does nothing to mention that user should accept the tag before it is shown to anyone. Very bad for user privacy. --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story The story is worth keeping for the discussion on privacy features. Can all of the privacy requirements of a centralised social network be kept in a distributed one? Should the owner of the photo rather reduce the visibility of the photo? In a decentralised network where nobody has a full view over all the information is tagging someone as problematic as when all the information is on a centralised network where one actor can track every information? What are the issues with tagging people in centralised social networks exactly? ( it may be that the problem is more todo with the notification system )

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Tagging location can be a huge invasion of privacy. The photo uploader needs to be able to accept (opt-in to loation tagging) prior to the photo being tagged. Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 But privacy and security need to be considered carefully. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 does Dora only remove Cassie's location tag from her copy? Unclear Kevin Marks (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Assuming approval of tag by... all associated users? (Controversy a while back about facebook allowing people's friends to check them in to places in this way). Could do location tagging on a text post too, no need for photo. Amy Guy (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 To location tagging. Unsure about letting other users do it though. --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Answering a question

Erica posts a question to a social collaboration platform.
Julia sees the question and responds with a suggested solution.
Elise sees both the original question and the response from Julia in her activity stream and recommends the answer provided by Julia.
Erica gets an notified about activity on her question. She reads Julia's response and selects it as "answering" her question.

From: Adam Boyet

+0. This exists in GNU Social. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Seems to just be a customization of a post with comments. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 - Adam Boyet (talk) 02:33, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Core requirement for many similar/related use cases Bill Looby 23:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 This sounds like a post with comments. The only thing unique is marking a particular comment as the "answer". — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This seems useful though I would rather extend this to be a generic "up vote" or "down vote" in response to the answer to show approval of it and a question to be a "note". Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems like posts and replies, and maybe marking 'answer' is a special case of 'like'..? (I think I will implement as such on my own site) Amy Guy (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Notes and replies should cover this. Maybe in future revisions a stack overflow style "this is the answer" could be considered. --Bret Comnes (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Useful yet seems duplicate of other stories. Unsure of specific Q&A types. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Browsing the Friendship Graph

Samwise is looking for new contacts (for a surprise party, new business, your guess)
Samwise is browsing his list of contacts.
Alissa has previously allowed Samwise to see her list of contact.
Samwise also browses the list of Alissa (his contact).

From: User:lfi

+0. I think this is mostly covered under the #Adding friends story. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Implies controlling who can and cannot see your contact list. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 - Is this a "list a person's contacts" user story or a story about "allowing users to control" who can see their contacts? Would probably change our vote if the story was more clear on its intent. Adam Boyet (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 I don't think browsing contact lists is useful for the first version, especially if there is already a way to browse following/follower lists. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Sitting this one out ;) Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story (talk) 18:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Obviously very important to be able to browse friends of friends, or find relations via friends. Have implemented this at least 4 times allready. Access Control issues are out of scope so should not be a reason to be against the story

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems useful but not sure if access control should be at an API level? Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Is 'contact list' a curated collection of users (like a G+ circle/#Contact lists) or auto generated list of friends/followers/followees? Amy Guy (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems like crossover with contacts/friends lists and actual social relations don't map to a graph all that well--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I like the permissions in this better than the other friends story. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Two CEOs Follow Each other

James meets Carly at a golf club. They are both CEOs. They can think of some good synergies between their companies.
They exchange cards ( which contain their global identifiers tied to their Company Social Web Platform )
Carly as she is driven home after the event enters James' identifier into her Social Web UI and finds the public information about James, his company, and others in her network who know him.
Carly reads James' latest blog entries
She is confident she has the right information, follows him, and send him a hello message.
James the next day opens his Social Web Inbox. He finds Carly's message, the info on her public profile and the NASDAQ info about her company.
James follows Carly back.

From User:Bblfish.

+0. This seems about the same as #Following a person. I don't understand the Web UI aspect, since these are Social API user stories. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

0. Agree this is similar to #Following a person and sending a message to them — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. - Might be missing a point that we don't quite get from the story as described here Adam Boyet (talk) 02:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 As per other comments - looks similar to previous unless public information lookup is intended to differentiate ? Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Agreed that this seems similar to existing stories. Adding a "-" because I don't understand the relevance of the NASDAQ info lookup. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This is the same as following but the distributed nature of the following is emphasised. In a distributed setting verifying trust requires more work.

-0 Not really sure what this provides that others haven't already Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Same as Chris, seems covered by other stories. Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I do not want to decide which story duplicates another one. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Amy Guy (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 profiles, following, friending, inbox/stream--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 key parts already covered by other stories. details added here are not core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Follow a neighbourhood group

Joe, Jane and their children move into a new house and Joe brings his personal server to the new house, and switches it on by plugging it into the wall and connecting it to the fibre optic cable.
The server sets up the DNS so that all Joe's previous contents are now available at the same URLs as in his previous house, meaning that his social network is back online.
One of Jane's friends notices their new geo-location over the web and introduces them to Jack, one of Joe's neighbours.
Jack and Joe accept the friend of a friend (foaf) invitation and Jack comes by the next day to say hello.
Jack adds the family to the neighbourhood group ( stored somewhere ), and sends Joe a hello message welcoming him to the group.
Joe receives the hello message the next day, visits the group, and leaves an introductory message for his neighbours.
On that group Jane discovers that there is a collective barbecue the next weekend and leaves time in the calendar for the family to go there with the family.
After the barbecue Joe connects up directly with some of the neighbours he ended up in longer conversations with.
These closer friend relations gives those neighbours more access to each others plans, allowing them for example to organise taking kids to school on a rotary basis.

From: User:Bblfish

-0. Seems like mostly a dupe of #Groups, with lots of plumbing added. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Too complex — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Does seem like fair amount of overlap with #Groups Adam Boyet (talk) 03:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 This seems to boil down to simple 'groups by invitation' with a notice board. Plus one for that. Last line is probably not needed ? Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Agreed with Evan Prodromou — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC) This brings in a few new features not found in other use stories: the ability to move from one location to another without loosing one's social network, to be able to have the information on one's own hardware such as the Freedom Box, etc... it is a story that emphasises the distributed nature of what we are doing

-0 This seems really complicated and I'm not sure this would be used all that much Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate in part? Maybe. But probably not completely. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 06:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Seems like #Groups with plumbing. Freedom box angle is important in general but not part of API? Amy Guy (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Geotagging, friending, groups from above. I think the hosting strategy is interesting. Does it need special API consideration?--Bret Comnes (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 already covered more generically by the previous groups story. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Co-operation between NGOs

Three NGOs are working in different ways on the topic of Global Warming (GW). Members meet at a conference at which they decide to co-operate on their research
Each NGO adds the others NGOs GW group to their GW group.
The members of each NGO can now see content posted by the others to their servers and can comment on it, etc, as if they formed part of the same NGO
As they explore the topic they discover that their work is completed nicely with that work from a university and meteorological project with access to satellite data
They add those two groups to their GW group and can now co-operate with those players on specific topics too, gaining access to scientific reports and data from the University, and historical as well as currentl data from the satellite

From User:Bblfish

+0. It seems tricky to work out permissions when you have groups in groups. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Agreed, this is tricky, but I am interested in it. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 - This pattern could be applied between to different companies or two different collaboration systems within a company. It is a serious problem when attempting to collaborate between different companies. Adam Boyet (talk) 05:44, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Good story but the implication that the group ownership is distributed rather than managed by a single service may not be a priority Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 This seems overly complicated for a first version. Also it is not clear whether the content being created is supposed to be private. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story it's the distributed nature here that is to be emphasised. How far this WG goes into groups of groups is a different matter, but what the group does should make it easy to do that too.

+0 I think group to group communication seems worthwhile to have clear... I'm not sure how I would implement it though Christopher Webber (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Permissions would be tricky but sure, I'm not opposed to this. Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Groups in groups interesting, still thinking about Groups as collections of users + collections of selected posts Amy Guy (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 let's solve people to people social web before org to org. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Product issue reports

Each product a company makes has its own URL which can be read off the product. From that URL the user can find the history of the product, from creation to the present.
Only the current buyer and the company has access to that page
A user finds a problem with his product and goes to his Product page. There he can open a new bug report.
He can upload pictures of the problem, descriptions, and discuss with the Technical Support Staff
The Technical Support Staff or the User can add new people to the discussion, eg. technical experts, parts manufacturers, sales people, legal, etc...
New members can then contribute to the discussion bringing their expertise to bear.

From User:Bblfish

+0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Doesn't really seem like a social network feature to me. Perhaps a company would have a social account that could handle, but getting to product level gets too specific. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0. - is this a basic post used for support? Adam Boyet (talk) 05:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00 There's nothing specific about this case. It's just "Issue" tracking which is just another type of content. It doesn't need to be called out explicitly

0 Bill Looby 00:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Out of scope for the first version especially because of the restriction of "only the current buyer and the company..." — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story This is a story to help extend the conception of what the Social Web is about. There are very big uses cases for distributed bug databases. As for access control, this WG is not working on web access control problems. They have to be accepted as resolved by the group. So the fact that the access control issue is out of scope is not a reason to reject the story - any distributed story will come accross access control issues.

+0 Christopher Webber (talk) 18:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 A "product" can be many things. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Non-users (ie. concepts and inanimate objects) being able to have 'profiles' which users can interact with in similar ways to users' profiles (eg. facebook Page vs Profile) Amy Guy (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Social Web is not bugzilla. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Group Coordination

Jacky, Joe, Joan and Jim agree to meet in the city.
While converging towards each other they can observe the progress of their peers.
As Joan has found a nice cafe and proposes a new meeting point there
The friends agree and adapt their routes
Joe observes that Jacky is taking a very similar route and adapts his route to meet her earlier.
The friends meet at the new meeting point.

From: User:lfi

-1. I have no idea how to do all this with an API. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. I can't see the API handling tracking user's GPS in real time and coordinating them. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 - feels like a specific application more so than a general social user story Adam Boyet (talk) 05:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 May be some location-object and/or live/push/poll requirements out of this, but agree it's not really a social story Bill Looby 00:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 As much as I love location-based tech and live-updating GPS trails, I don't see how this fits into a social web API, much less the first version of one. A lot of this communication could take place with public or private group messages as well. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, we have decentralized prototype from 1.5year ago doing almost something like that dspace-app — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Henry Story (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC) I am not sure how to implement this, but I suppose one should look at how Elf does this. I wonder if this would not best be done using webRTC?

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 because a prototype exists according to Pavlik elf Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Live GPS tracking probably out of scope for social API; could be multiple automated rapid-fire checkins, which is app-specific function not API Amy Guy (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I agree this should be implemented, but not sure if it needs a user story for the API. Might help solve some of the tricky routes of things. Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 in practice such tracking UX has been creepy / abandoned. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

General social network client

Conchita is an iOS developer. She creates a native iOS social client.
Denise downloads Conchita's application to her iPhone. She starts the program and shares her authentication credentials and the social API endpoints for her social network server.
Conchita's application determines the version of the social API that the server implements. The application only uses API calls that are defined in that version.
Denise can then do any of the tasks indicated by the above user stories that Conchita's software supports.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Already made an android app that anyone using Socialwg/Social_API/Micropub can use to post data. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 - Adam Boyet (talk) 05:52, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 iOS is just another client (i.e. mostly already covered), but API versioning is worth calling out Bill Looby 00:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 The API should avoid the need for versioning. This is difficult but possible with good REST APIs and great clients. In addition to that I hope that Conchita will change her mind and use web-technologies. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Bret Comnes (talk) 18:05, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Seems necessary for the API to actually work. Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 for iOS/native specific aspects, "download" app, etc. "Web" focus means no "native app" support needed. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Developing a Smart client

Conchita is an iOS and Android developer. She creates a native social client iFoaf that allows people to explore friends of friends networks across the world.
She developed a version for blind people, one for people with sight problems, and one very elegant version.
The application only consumes data published by the server and interacts using the Social Web API. This is what allows her to refine the UI needs for the particular groups of disabilities in question.

From User:Bblfish.

-0. This seems like a duplicate of #General social network client with FOAF injected. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Duplicate. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0- What are the difference between this and #General social network client other than the duly noted sensitivity to disabilities Adam Boyet (talk) 05:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 Bill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story The difference is that by making it clear that it is data driving the user interface, not html, it becomes clear how one can create very different user agents. I am fine with bringing the two stories together - I just did not want to change someone else's stories.

-1 This seems like a duplicate — Aaron Parecki (talk) 18:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Seems like a duplicate to me too --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 for the reasons provided by Henry Story Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Duplicate of #General social network client, accessible client is not API Amy Guy (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I think having accessibility focused stories and being clear that being able to be driven by that is important Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 would rather make sure all APIs have accessibility built-in, rather than one specific story. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Using a Smart Client

Jillian downloads iFoaf to her smart phone, starts the program, enters her identity, and authenticates herself to her home server. The client gets her profile data and initiates the application with data taken from her Social Web Server and her client
The Application asks Jillian if she wishes to add people found in the smart phone address book to one of her already published groups or a new one. Denise publishes them to a new group, to categorise later
As Jillian is an EFF advocate she travels a lot, and so do many of the people she is in contact with. So she often does not know what time it is for the person she wants to call. But she has convinced 50% of her friends to have their own home servers with Social Web compliant APIs.
Jillian uses iFoaf to call people.
- If the person she wishes to call publishes her time zone info, Jillian can know if it is advisable to call them.
- Jillian always gets the latest phone number people are using, and never has out of date phone numbers
As Jillian travels iFoaf can let her know what friends of hers happen to be in the same town. She can quickly message them to say hello.
Any messages Jillian sends travels over an encrypted channel directly to her friends computer, so Jillian knows that her messages are never read by anyone else than their intended recipients.
Jillian's server also allows traffic over Tor, to allow her to communicate with people in politically sensitive positions.

From User:Bblfish.

-0. A lot of plumbing. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Getting location, phone, etc is assumed when you get another user's profile. Determining when to call, what their timezone offset is, etc would be more something the app deals with. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Hard to parse through all the "smart" aspects involved to make an educated assessment in order to support, especially for the first release Adam Boyet (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Unclear what the actual goals or concrete implementation would be. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 IMHO user stories should be simple and describing some exact story. This covers many stories. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 seems to be a bit to much for one story Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 'Smart' timezone detection is cool, but app-specific not social API. Keeping up-to-date profile info is duplicate of any user-profile-consumption story Amy Guy (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Henry Story (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC) I have written such an ifoaf client and presented it as far back as 2008 at JavaOne. Adding Tor is transparent. Distributed Authentication is out of scope but feasible with The WebID Stack and perhaps with others. Time zone detection is easy: you publish your time zone in your profile, or you publish your geo coordinates. The rest is pretty simple maths.

-0 Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 too much plumbing for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Dedicated hardware

Clarence creates a new bathroom scale.
Dianne buys one of Clarence's scales. She shares her authentication credentials and the social API endpoints for her social network server.
Dianne weighs herself on her bathroom scale and reaches a new personal weight record. She presses a button on the scale to share the reading with her followers.
Dianne's followers receive a notice that Dianne has reached a new personal weight record.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. - Adam Boyet (talk) 06:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 Not sure this raises anything not already covered, but valid use case Bill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably not, but I wanted to get a developer use case that wasn't about a general-purpose social network client. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I have already implemented publishing my weight from my bathroom scale[5] — Aaron Parecki (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Jessica Tallon (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 but myself not interested in the weight of other people Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Why do we need a hardware tie-in? The API should be generic enough to handle this. Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 having at least one hardware story like this will help flesh out UX assumptions. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Social network analysis

Abel provides a Web site that suggest new friends for social network users using triadic closure.
Beatrice shares her authentication credentials and the social API endpoints for her social network server.
Abel's software retrieves a list of all of Beatrice's friends.
For each of Beatrice's friends, Abel's software retrieves that friend's list of friends.
Abel's software calculates the count of incoming edges for all people in Beatrice's two-level social network.
Abel's software shows Beatrice a list of the top 5 people sorted by incoming edge count that she may want to friend or follow.
Beatrice notices that this is list is of her ex-boyfriends, and deletes her data from Abel's site so they don't stalk her

From Evan Prodromou

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Is this a story about the analysis aspects or recommendations? We definitely support an API for recommendations. However there are multiple types of SNA analysis and should be an implementation choice of the SNA recommendation provider and not part of the social API. Adam Boyet (talk) approx. 06:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

It's about the analysis. The API should let applications do statistical analysis on the social data (with the user's permission). --Evan Prodromou (talk) 20:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00 Important but not something we need for the API right now

0 Deletion is worth calling out on its own possibly, but analysis is just another client ?Bill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Doesn't seem very high on a priority list imho --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 This seems like it's already covered by the ability to share a list of "friends" with applications. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Just a different type of client? SNA important for researchers, but concerned that Beatrice's friends don't get to allow or disallow Abel's software from getting their friend lists Amy Guy (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems important, but not really sure how we'd bake this requirement into the API document itself, other than "it should be possible" Christopher Webber (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 seems to require too much specific plumbing for a v1, though I can see the general functionality having some utility. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

New social network service

Noor creates a new video-sharing social network service.
Noor implements the social API on her service.
Noor puts instructions on how to provide credentials and social API endpoints to client software on her Web site.
Zoe uses Noor's video-sharing service. She has a third-party client on her Android tablet. She also uses a friend-suggester Web application.

From Evan Prodromou

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0. What is new or different with respect to the social API with this user story over the previous ones. Not clear what is unique or novel about this one. Adam Boyet (talk) approx. 06:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

The story is from the network service developer's point of view, rather than the client software developer. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 As per above - not sure whats newBill Looby 00:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 A client is a client, no need to map each one to a separate user story :) --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Not sure what is unique about this story. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I fear that I do not understand what this is about. Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Not sure what is unique Amy Guy (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Unsure what this story adds other than the API assumptions (different topologies etc.) we already have at the top. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Noor can implement the Social API and be connected to an ecosystem of third-party apps. It's the network effect at work, from the social network implementer's standpoint. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Integration : New social capability with zero cost

Hussam has developed a new lightweight dynamic content evaluation system that values content according to the the associated 'trending' of the keywords at various popular social sites at that point and time
He can do this for any content as long as it provides textual content for him to work with
Hussam registers his service with a Social Platform provider
David manages a simple presentation-document management system that already uses the Social Platform to provide liking and commenting
David selects to enable Hussams service for his system (using his application-admin capability on the Social Platform)
Davids users now see an additional capability in the presentation management system that allows them to evaluate presentations for 'trendiness'
Hussams evaluation system provides this using only the data that is made available to the Social Platform

Key Point : The new service can act on all aggregated social content without knowing about the specific provider.

From Bill Looby

+0. I don't understand this one. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:40, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

? James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Bill Looby (talk) 00:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0.4 Henry Story This is just saying that there is an Actor that I can give access to some of my content who can annotate that content. As it happens the annotator may be a large service that does this automatically. This does bring up the issues that are out of scope, but interesting as to how do I licence work for such an actor so that he cannot republish it or share it.

(Henry -- I don't see anything about annotation ..??) Ann Bassetti

-1 I do not understand this one, User story is too complex, including it would just confuse thing. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I think the title is misleading. I read this to be 'valuing textual content based on trending key words'. This could be valuable in big enterprise, but I agree it would be complex to implement, and probably too much for our first cut. Ann Bassetti (talk) 02:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 The story is too complex, I don't see the primary goal of the story, so it feels out of scope. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Maybe I'm missing something, but basically a duplicate of #Social network analysis with a different process/outcome? ie. someone authorises an app to have access to their posts, the app does something with the posts and returns something. Amy Guy (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 not buying this complexity at "zero cost" to user. Impractical. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Integration : Exposing Social data to an appropriate few

Mark has integrated Commenting, Liking and Badging capabilities to his Sales-Lead management system with minimal effort
Many of these Sales leads are confidential and Mark's management system allows for the provision of appropriate access control
The communication of this access control to the Social Platform means these restrictions are recognised wherever this content is used

From Bill Looby

+1. I think if you do any of the above integration, you have to allow private access. Still, really hard to manage. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 This is difficult to manage alright, but vital in an enterprise Bill Looby (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 We have this problem in several different aspects of our social networking system. Carrying the credentials with the content, per user, seems complicated. Extremely important in company like ours, with additional restrictions for defense and other governmental contracts. Huge fines and other punishment can be levied if you share content with the 'wrong' person, where "wrong" can be a combination of attributes (location, citizenship, employer, security clearance, etc). Ann Bassetti (talk) 02:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 The private content that I create on my website also provides the list of people it was shared with, so that if someone were to copy it to their system they would have the original audience restrictions along with the post as well. However I am giving it +0 because I'm okay with not seeing this in the first version. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 but privacy of users must be respected Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Sharing access control restrictions along with content, but maybe not in this version Amy Guy (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 some access control good, perhaps not this much. Also, badging is not something that's worked out well. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Integration : Bringing tools together

Lorenzo, Karen and Kazuko are working on a proposal for a revolutionary new silicon doping process.
They bring a number of tools (research lookup, discussion, diagrams, feeds) together in a single place, limiting access to only themselves for now
John and Siobhan have developed some of these tools which can work entirely independently, knowing only the 'place' (with appropriate name etc.) where their tool is being applied.

Note : This is very similar to the previous story, the main difference being the previous one is solely about the people, whereas this is about the named place. In practise they are likely to be combined. Additional Information' - The tools in question need a shared reference and possible lifecycle management. So, the discussion tool (for example) may need to create an appropriately named forum (which may need removal when the place is removed).

From Bill Looby

-1. What's the API angle here? --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Why would John and Siobhan need to know where their tool is being used at all? — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 For communities in Connections, bringing people together is the first requirement (previous story), applying those people as Access Control to objects brought to the community by other services is key, as is providing a community id that each service can reference Bill Looby (talk) 01:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

?? Is this just groups with security? A group with limited/controlled access? If so, +1. We have this implemeented. Adam Boyet (talk) 04:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 What new part of the API does this require? — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Amy Guy (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this sounds like groupware, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Offering asparagus

Farmer MacDonald advertises the availability of 100 cases of asparagus on his farm profile
Alice demands 20 cases
Bob demands 40 cases
Farmer approves Alice's demand of 20
Farmer replies to Bob's demand that he has only 20 cases left
Bob approves modified demand with 20 cases

"based on A Farmer in many Food Networks use case. also very similar use cases of such interactions for: carpooling, couchsurfing/flat rental, mealsharing etc."

From: elf Pavlik

+0. I can see doing this with custom AS2.0 activity types, a la the Question-and-Answer system. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. A process that has inventory is naturally a marketplace and where I think 'social' will create the most value. A vocabulary that defines objects makes the objects a first class citizen equal to users, which I think is a great enabler of collaboration. --Lloyd Fassett (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I feel like this is actually the same as #Posting polls and #Answering polls (as far as the API is concerned). It's a post that has some specific set of responses it can get. Actually the same with Events. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 Bill Looby (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I like the general concept, with applicability to assorted supply / demand situations. Since I am not a developer, I don't know how this works vis-à-vis APIs. Is Ben's observation about potentially related APIs correct? I don't know enough to compare that with Evan's AS2.0 suggestion. Ann Bassetti (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 This seems able to be accomplished by comments on a post. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I plan to implement offers/taken posts on my site (like Freegle/Freecycle) just as posts and replies. Maybe tying in with an inventory system is a customisation outside of API scope. Although I also agree with Lloyd about objects being first-class, and tracking who has something could be interesting. Amy Guy (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 comments covers this without complex scenario / numbers implications. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Demanding help with the harvest

Farmer MacDonald advertises demand for 5 people helping with harvesting asparagus on given 10 days
Alice offers help on 6 of those days
Bob offers help on all 10 days
Farmer approves Alice's offer of help on 6 days
Farmer replies to Bob's offer that he still needs help only on 4 days
Bob approves modified offer for 4 days

"based on A Farmer in many Food Networks use case. also very similar use cases of such interactions for: carpooling, couchsurfing/flat rental, mealsharing etc."

From: elf Pavlik

+0. I can see doing this with custom AS2.0 activity types, a la the Question-and-Answer system. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. very similar to the previous one. Only change seems to be outside of the API. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 Not sure specific support is needed Bill Looby (talk) 01:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 02:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 This seems doable with comments on a post, and if it requires something more, I have no plans to implement. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:05, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems to generalise to events/rsvp, which I plan to implement, and would do this in the same way eg. if I needed help organising conference or something. Amy Guy (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 comments covers this without complex scenario / numbers implications. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Adding regrets for next telecon

Kevin marks that he will not participate in next WG telecon

From: elf Pavlik

-0. I find this group of user stories really excessive. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. This User Story is just posting a comment or creating a post to say as much. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 No real additional object or relationship here ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 A bit too specific for a generic API --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 I don't get the "social" aspect of this, elf. What am I missing? Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Already implemented. This sounds like RSVP'ing for an event. I have implemented sending and receiving RSVP posts on my site since June 2013. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 for RSVP to an event, plan to implement. Amy Guy (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 only if this is just an "RSVP no to an event", in which case, I've implemented it. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Assigning roles during meeting

Telecon starts
Ann assigns herself as a chair
Lloyd assigns himself as a scribe

From: elf Pavlik

-1. I don't think we need to manage teleconferences with this API. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Perhaps later, but not for the first version of the API. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I created a more generic version of this that, while I still think may be out of scope for a first revision, I think it will be clearer Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories#Labels_for_event_attendees Benjamin Roberts (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 The general case of managing object-role relationships might be worth capturing, but not as a priority Bill Looby (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Kinda interesting in other contexts, like managing roles in events --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I'm persuaded by Bill and Jason's comments. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:09, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Out of scope for the first version, I have no plans to implement — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 for assigning roles, useful for many social situations (eg. task management/collaboration; users can be attributed to roles for collab media projects on [6]; I can 'assign myself' as someone's sister on facebook). Amy Guy (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 too specific, not core. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Reply in a discussion

Henry posts a reply to discussion started by Tantek

From: elf Pavlik

-1. How is this different from #Responses above? --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC) |

This story started in W3C Group Collaboration and now suffers from landing out of context, I'll add clarification under the story! Pavlik elf (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

This story differs from #Responses story in a way that neither Henry or Tantek post on their personal walls! We talk about posting to a mailing-list, wiki talk page or facebook group. Please note that many people set facebook groups type to closed so that posts shared there do NOT show on their personal walls! - imagine very peculiar permathread (let's say httpRange-14 related issue) which you don't want to spam people who follow you. Pavlik elf (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

0. This User Story needs to be clarified. I think Pavlik elf was trying to capture that not all posts need to be made to the stream/wall of a user. Some comments may be private (only viewable by a specific person/people) and some comments might be public but not published to a wall. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

? James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-1 already covered Bill Looby (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Duplicate --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Need more clarification; seems like a duplicate. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 duplicate/not clear — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Really reply to whole "discussion"? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Seems like a duplicate, ie. posting on personal wall plus access control Amy Guy (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 seems like either a duplicate, or object to "neither Henry or Tantek post on their personal (site)". Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Respond to pool to choose meeting dates

Arnaud creates pool to pick dates for next f2f providing certain possible dates
elf replies to this pool picking few of the dates according to his availability

From: elf Pavlik

-0. This could probably be handled with a custom activity type. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I think this is clearer as #Posting polls and #Answering polls but with any response valid, not just a specific set. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 Bill Looby (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Seems to be overlap per Ben's note (posting and answering polls). Contrary to Ben, I do see the need for both "any response valid" and "choose from this set". I don't know if these differences require different APIs. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Agreed with Ben that it's simliar to polls, and seems out of scope for version 1. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 for posting and answering polls, common on many social platforms including facebook. Amy Guy (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is calendaring, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Creating new action for a product

Tantek creates new action 'review microformats' on Activity Streams 2.0 product using default due date
Tantek moves default due date a week later

From: elf Pavlik

-0. Maybe we should nail down our basic social API before dealing with these complicated groupware flows? --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Out of scope of an initial version. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 I think we can manage date association in an object without getting into the details of Workflow. This (in association with object types) could enable highly functional calendar generation/inclusion Bill Looby (talk) 01:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Out of scope for a social API, we are not making a ticketing system or CRM — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1/0 -- +1 for creating and assigning and completing tasks (as in Trello and other task management/collab) but 0 I'm not sure about necessity of attaching action to an object, but maybe missing something Amy Guy (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is task tracking, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Completing an action

Sandro completes action 'organize videoconf equipment for next f2f'
Sandro adds references (URI) of each piece of equipment tracked in university inventory system

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Out of scope of an initial version. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 Anything we need should already be covered by the previous story Bill Looby (talk) 01:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 I don't get the "social" aspect of this. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Out of scope — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1/-1 -- +1 for creating and assigning and completing tasks (as in Trello and other task management/collab) but -1 for tying into a custom inventory system (app-specific not API) Amy Guy (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is task/resource tracking, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Invited member request workflow

Michael requests joining WG as Invited Expert
Arnaud ok request
Tantek objects leaving comment
Evan ok request
Evan replies to comment from Tantek's objection
Tantek ok request overwriting his objection

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Out of scope of an initial version. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 Bill Looby (talk) 01:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 If this was a "invited member to restricted group" it would be interesting. Well it kinda is, but anyway, not version 1 stuff. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 We have "person requests membership in restricted group" capability in our internal tool, which is crucial for groups that have restricted access (such as #Integration : Exposing Social data to an appropriate few). Unless Adam Boyet says that was easy to implement, seems like this is too much for first cut. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Out of scope for first version — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Duplicate of joining groups? Amy Guy (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is too specific, not needed for v1. simpler groups / request / accept / reject is fine. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Public Working Draft release workflow

James starts motion for releasing new version of AS2.0 public drafts
Harry ok it and request publishing from W3C webmaster
W3C webmaster runs validations and finds errors
James updates draft fixing validation errors
W3C webmaster publishes new drafts

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Out of scope of an initial version. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 Bill Looby (talk) 01:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Not sure at all how this fits into any kind of social API except via polls. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 What's the social aspect? Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Seems doable with creating and updating posts and handling replies, but not sure how this specific case fits into a social API — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Assuming this generalises to creating/assigning/completing tasks Amy Guy (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is workflow/groupware, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Requesting telecon bridge

Larry requests telecon bridge for 6 people on Feb, 15th 2015 14:00UTC lasting 2 hours

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Out of scope of an initial version. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 No specific support required I believe Bill Looby (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Seems like a calendar / scheduling function, rather than "social". Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Other than creating an event, this is out of scope — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Struggling to generalise to social case Amy Guy (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is task/resource tracking, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Voting on accepting User Stories

Evan creates voting pool for a collection of User Stories, ending in two weeks
Erik votes on some of them
Aaron also votes on some of proposed stories
Erik, after re-reading some stories adjusts his vote

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

0. Another version of polling / Question & Answer. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 Polling Bill Looby (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Seems a very complex type of poll version which definitely should not be prio 1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Even though I have implemented this (and have been voting on these stories from my site) I am going to -1 for being out of scope — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Generalises to duplicate of polling like #Respond to pool to choose meeting dates but note most polling systems let you change your vote, so maybe this emphasis is useful. Amy Guy (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 too specific, not needed for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Creating new grouping of User Stories

Tantek creates new grouping of User Stories called 'IndieWeb'
Tantek adds two of existing stories to that grouping
Tantek creates two more stories in a way that automatically adds them to this grouping
Tantek changes his mind and removes one of the previously added User Stories from this grouping

suggested by Tantek during teleconf: http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-02-10/line/1423593502895

From: elf Pavlik

-0. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

0. Could this be accomplished by #tagging posts? — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-1 Content grouping is not a social activity ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Not sure how this relates to a Social API --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Agreed with Ben that this seems like it could be done by tagging posts. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 -- just generalises to curating collections of posts? Amy Guy (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is duplicate of just "tagging", and unnecessary. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Blocking a User

Kat share some posts publically
Rachel comments negatively on Kat's posts
Kat blocks Rachel from commenting on her posts

From: Alan Dawson

+1. Thanks for adding this! Not sure how we missed it. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 Just concerned that the mechanism for blocking may be considered separate and blocking capabilities/approach may be service-specific Bill Looby (talk) 01:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Note that we do not enable this in the enterprise. But we don't need it much because A) we do we allow anonymous posting, and B) one can be disciplined for bad behavior in posts and comments. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I plan to implement this — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Bret Comnes (talk) 18:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hiding Content from a User

Sam is fed up of Joe's posts, but doesn't want to offend Joe
Sam chooses to hide Joe's posts so they never appear, without blocking or unfollowing Joe

From: User:rhiaro

+1. But 'never appear' is really hard to do. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. not appear in recent updates/inbox but would likely want to see comments or context might get confusing. This sounds more like an aspect of whatever Sam is using to read Posts. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 Is this an AS story only or does it cover core content (e.g. viewing shared files - block a particular file) Bill Looby (talk) 01:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Again, seems pertinent in public, but we would not do this in the enterprise, for reasons stated at #Blocking a User. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Sounds like a "mute" feature? I plan to implement this as part of my reader. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 16:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hiding Content by Topic

It's the World Cup and everyone in Sam's social feed is talking about football; Sam doesn't care about football
Sam hides all content that mentions 'football'

From: User:rhiaro

+1. Again, really hard to do. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Could hide based on tagging or keyword searching. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+0 Nice story, but can't believe it's a priority Bill Looby (talk) 01:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Easy to do if #hashtags are used as a way to filter content, like on diaspora* --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 I'm neutral about this in public context. (Personally, I'd vote -1, as I'm against personalized filter bubbles. But that's a social judgement.) I'd like to think we would not do this in the enterprise, although there is recurrent talk of delivering information based on "personas". Blech. Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 'Mute' by (hash)tag/keyword/thread is common on social sites Amy Guy (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 While I support the idea, this seems like a feature of a client like a reader, not of the core API. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Separation of Domain

Nancy wants to join a political discussion group but is afraid her involvement could have negative effects on her other activities.
Nancy selects to use a distinguished identity within this group that cannot be linked to other identities of her
Bob who knows Nancy under her discussion and her family identities is not aware of the connection between the two.
Nancy mentions her appearance at a given event in the discussion group.
When later she discusses about the same event in her family domain, she is made aware of this before the mention is published. (Potential unintended inference)
Nancy now selectively decides that Bob may know of the interconnection between the two identities, but will be informed, of Nancy's wish to keep them seperated in general.
When Bob inadvertedly mentions Nancies appearance within the family domain, and is made aware of the indiscretion before his mention is published.
Bob decides to respect Nancy's wish and rephrases his mention, leaving out the treacherous detail.

From: Lars Fischer

-0. I'm not sure of the API angle, and the NLP stuff seems hard to put into a standard. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. This could be accomplished just by creating a new account. --Ben Roberts (talk) 12:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 Interesting topic for discussion, but attempting to support could derail, as implications are complex. Bill Looby (talk) 01:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Seems very complex to implement. Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Perhaps more next time Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Maybe in another version - complex, and detecting content could be considered job of app not API, but API allowing sending pre-publication notifications could be for this? Amy Guy (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Just make a new account — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 "use a distinguished identity within this group that cannot be linked to other identities" totally impractical for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Close account

Bob has been using the platform for a while and has done several posts and photo uploads
Bob has a friend Alice who can see Bob's posts and photos he has shared with her
Bob decides he doesn't like his account any more and uses the "Close account" feature
Alice signs in and cannot any more see Bob's posts or photos since they have been removed

From: Jason Robinson

+1. This is a lot harder in a distributed system, though! --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. I think its a core functionality to being able to delete all posts/history. — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Right, but if you're storing data on the receiving end, it's almost impossible to ensure that the receivers will delete the data. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree, currently I allow people to delete comments from my posts but not context (my repost of their content). I still maintain their content on my site. No matter what, on the web, someone can always grab a copy of your data, you cannot presume to be able to delete every copy. Benjamin Roberts (talk)

+1 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Agree on importance, but also need close account without removal (more common enterprise requirement), and possibly remove all references, where an account doesn't even exist (e.g. references by email address) ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This is critical, even if no guarantee can be made that other instances remove the content. Users must be able to trigger the removal. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This issue is about what happens to one's content when you close an account. In the public, I understand wanting to delete and control your own content. In our company, your content remains after you leave, because it's part of corporate knowledge which we seek to capture. (Technically it's owned by the company, not the individual.) Question: How does the handling of deleted content in this situation (closing account) differ from handling of deleted content in other stories (e.g., #User posts a note, #User posts a file, #Organizing content)? We don't even let people edit their posts after 1 hour, let alone delete! Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I have no plans to implement a "delete" feature of my own profile, nor do I want to support someone removing all their content from my website, except for on a post-by-post basis. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 I don't think a distributed system can require this, or if it does, it borders on requiring DRM which is bad. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Comment on content

Alice publishes a post writing about how awesome Python is
Bob likes PHP. He comments on the post by Alice highlighting how awesome PHP is
George, following Alice, comments also highlighting the benefits of Ruby
Bob later realizes PHP is bad and deletes his comment

From: Jason Robinson

+0. I don't see the difference from #Responses. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Duplicate — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)\

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

0 duplicate Bill Looby (talk) 01:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 looks duplicate — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Sorry yes, it's a dupe :( --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 haha, thanks for owning up, Jason! Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Duplicate Amy Guy (talk) 17:09, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Duplicate — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Duplicate Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 but duplicate (or another story is the duplicate) Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Profile tags

Bob signs up to the platform. He likes PHP and adds to his "Profile tags" the tag #PHP. Bob wants other people to see this information so he has it as public.
George, who doesn't know Bob, is interested in PHP and searches for content relating to the tag #PHP
George sees a list of people tagging themselves with #PHP and clicks the profile of Bob
Bob later decides PHP is bad and removes the tag #PHP from his profile

From: Jason Robinson

+0. This is in GNU Social. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:01, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Not sure searching for other users is in scope of the API, seems like search engine territory. — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 This is core to me - social tagging of users. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 One of the best things about diaspora* profiles - makes it possible to find people with similar interests --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 This is foundational in our tool, for skills identification. We use this capability in several important ways. Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 To tagging all the things! Amy Guy (talk) 17:09, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I support adding tags to one's user profile, but I'd rather leave search out of scope and let search engines handle it. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 to profile tagging, already part of h-card. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Search content with hashtags

Alice is interested in the W3C and uses the search by typing in #W3C
Alice sees a #W3C hashtag stream listing content that other users have created containing the hashtag #W3C

From: Jason Robinson

-1. I think search is probably difficult to do for this API. Maybe a separate API? --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Not sure searching is in scope of the API, seems like search engine territory. — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

-0 This seems more core search

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Agreed maybe not in scope of social API --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tags of various sorts are really important in our tool. We think this is important and have already implemented within the api. Adam Boyet (talk) 04:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Not sure if search is out of scope, but most APIs for centralised social sites have it. If instead of search it is 'get all posts tagged with tag' then I've implemented this on my site. Amy Guy (talk) 17:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I currently publish a feed of content with specific hashtags (e.g. aaronparecki.com/tag/socialwg), but I plan to leave cross-domain aggregation of tagged content to readers and search engines.[7] — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 In favor of search but not necessarily using hashtags Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Subscribe to hashtags

Alice is interested in the W3C and uses the search by typing in #W3C
Alice decides she likes W3C so much she clicks the "Subscribe" button
Alice now sees the contents tagged with #W3C in her combined stream and in her "Followed hashtags" stream
After a while Alice decides there are too many posts tagged with #W3C in her stream and unsubscribes from the #W3C hashtag

From: Jason Robinson

-0. This is somewhat a repeated search, not sure its part of the API, but some service should offer it. — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. This is a good case of functionality that's much, much easier to implement in a single social network than in a federated one. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Subscribe isn't search, as events appear in unfiltered stream. Actually think this is core. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 In favor of subscriptions of topics but not necessarily using hashtags Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Mentioning other users

Bob is writing a post about social networks and thinks his contact Alice would enjoy it too
Bob uses the "Mentions" Alice in the post (using @+name notation)
Alice gets a notification that she has been mentioned and visits the post
Alice decides she doesn't want to be mentioned in this post and can click "Unmention" that removes the link to her profile from the post

From: Jason Robinson

+1. This is pretty core, though stay away from exact notation for now. — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. I don't think we should specify the notation but this flow should work. Very similar to #Person tagging. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00 No different from tagging users

+1 This is tag in context with associated visuals and notifications, but I think the last point is completely separate and a low priority Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 But maybe generalises to duplicate of #Person tagging Amy Guy (talk) 17:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 We enable "mentions" but the other person cannot subsequently edit nor delete the mention. Again, the diff between inside and outside enterprise. I agree with Amy Guy this is similar to #Person tagging, but as we stated on that vote, we do not enable person tagging on photos for security and privacy reasons. Ann Bassetti (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 mentions yes, requiring @+name notation no. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 sounds like #Person tagging — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 but not necessarily supporting the specific "@+name"-notation Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Posting polls

George has a dilemma - he is not sure if he should learn Python, PHP or Ruby. George creates a public poll asking his contacts which they would suggest
George adds 3 answers to the poll, "Python", "PHP", "Ruby"
George tags the poll with the hashtag #programming
Alice who follows George sees the poll in her stream
Bob who doesn't follow George sees the poll while searching for content relating to #programming
Later George decides PHP is bad and removes the option to answer "PHP" in the poll

From: Jason Robinson

+1. I have had an itch to implement this, I think it could be generalized to many different types of cases (events, requests, votes, etc) — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 Assuming this is being taken as the main poll story Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. This is in GNU Social. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implement, but probably with posts and replies to start with. Amy Guy (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Useful, but not mandatory for first cut. Ann Bassetti (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 don't need polls for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 for version 1, since it can be accomplished with posting a note and reading the replies, as seen on many social networks and individual websites — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Answering polls

George has posted a poll with the options "Python", "PHP" and "Ruby"
Alice, who follows George, answers "Python"
Bob, who does not follow George, but found the post using the hashtag search, answers "PHP"
Bob later decides PHP is bad and changes his answer to "Ruby"
Wendy, who follows George, likes JavaScript. She cannot answer Javascript since it is not an option in the poll. She writes a comment asking George to add it as an option
George adds JavaScript as an option
Wendy answers the JavaScript option in the poll

From: Jason Robinson

+1. I have had an itch to implement this, I think it could be generalized to many different types of cases (events, requests, votes, etc) — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1 I'd put this in one story with the previous one (or I guess it's not really a poll) Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. In GNU Social. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implement, but probably just with posts and replies to start with. Amy Guy (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Useful, but not mandatory for first cut. (However, if one implements #Posting polls, it seems that "answering polls" would be mandatory.) Ann Bassetti (talk) 18:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 don't need polls for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Same as posting polls — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Reshare posts

Bob has posted a public post relating to JavaScript
Wendy likes JavaScript and reshares the post
Wendy later decides the post was not very good and removes the reshare

From: Jason Robinson

+1. Core functionality — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 James Snell 2015-02-22T10:16:00-7:00

+1. Core Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. This is already in #Responses. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Amy Guy (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Important functionality, but already in #Responses as pointed out by Evan Prodromou. -- Ann Bassetti (talk) 18:05, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 reposts are common. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Like content

Alice posts a post relating to PHP
Bob likes PHP so he likes Alice's post
Bob later decides PHP is bad and removes the like

From: Jason Robinson

+0. covered already by #Responses — Ben Roberts (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

0 as previous Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Okey dupe --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. In #Responses. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:33, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 #Responses. Amy Guy (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 likes are common. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Participate in content

Alice posts a post relating to PHP
George is interested in the post and wants to get notified of changes, so he creates a participation by clicking the "Participate" button. This ensures he will be notified of new comments
Bob likes PHP and comments on the post. He is now participating in the post and receives notifications
Wendy thinks the post is a good one and likes it. She is now participating in the post and receives notifications
Bob later decides PHP is bad and removes the comment from the post. He is no longer participating in the post
George later thinks he is getting too many notifications from the post and removes his participation
Wendy later thinks that the post is not good after all and removes the like on the post. She is no longer participating in it
Alice posted the post so she is always participating in it

From: Jason Robinson

+1. Its pretty important to be able to get notified on updates to posts. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 The participation is all implicit I think. Is there an API requirement here ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 The key to this user story is that there should be different ways to participate - one of which should be just a "notify me" type subscription. Commenting on a post and liking on it is visible participation to others. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I see the point. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Subscribing to anything. Amy Guy (talk) 17:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 notifications of (and subscribing to) a post is useful and semi-common. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Content location tagging

Bob is visiting Dublin. He likes it and wants his contacts to know he is posting from Dublin
Bob clicks the "Add location" icon and his browser will attempt to retrieve his location
Bob chooses "Dublin" from the list of locations suggested and posts the post
Alice is following Bob and reads his post. She sees the post as "Posted from Dublin"
Bob later decides Dublin is a bad place and removes the location from the post

From: Jason Robinson

+1. Should avoid UI in these stories but basic geotagging off data should certainly be possible. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0. Location tagging covered previously Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, duplicate? — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Created this story since it's not about location tagging other content but new content. If that doesn't require a separate story, this can be considered a dupe for sure. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Duplicate. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Duplicate of #Location tagging Amy Guy (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 duplicate without adding any value. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Remove comments from my content

Bob posts a post relating to PHP
Alice hates PHP. She lets her opinions known to Bob as a comment in the post
Bob likes PHP and finds the comment by Alice unwelcoming. He deletes the comment

From: Jason Robinson

+1. Bob can remove the comment from his post, But the content still exists for AAlice to view. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I think there are a number of combinations here. Notification is easy but trying to support specific flows (who has rights to delete what) and views (what appears for who afterwards) may be beyond the scope Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Pretty interesting flows here. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Need to think about this; Bob has the right not to see Alice's post in relation to his, doesn't have right to delete Alice's posts, and Alice's friends should still be able to see Alice's post *in context* with Bob's post... Amy Guy (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 In the enterprise, we do not allow anyone to delete comments, because it changes the understanding of subsequent comments. I am with Amy about the complexity of this situation in public scenario. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 must support deleting others' comments/interactions from your posts. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Report content

Alices hates PHP and posts a post relating to PHP using very foul language
Bob finds the post distasteful and wants to report it. He clicks the report button
The administrator who runs the server Alice is using to post receives a notification
The administrator decides that the content should be removed and removes the post

From: Jason Robinson

-1. I find anything that involves reporting things to site administrators to not make sense for distributed cases. As a site owner I am also administrator so this would just tell me who is reporting me. Enterprise or larger implementations can always add report buttons in to their own user profiles. — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I don't believe this is specifically social feature. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Note, "The administrator who runs the server Alice is using" - the report should go to the place where the content comes from, where that admin can then trigger a removal. It works in a distributed environment, this is already implemented in diaspora* (reporting of comments, posts and I think users - because spammers..). --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I think "report" should report to my server, and any other server-to-server flow should be handled in the protocol. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 where report goes to server hosting content. Ignoring this on basis that everyone will have a personal server is a bad idea, because that's infeasible, and we *need* to think about how abuse is handled from early on. Amy Guy (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 This seems like spam or bad behavior control rather than "social". At the same time, I agree with Amy that "abuse" situations should be considered early on. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 report abuse/spam is common and we should acknowledge. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Contest content report

Kat posts a video containing a song she composed
Bill is jealous of Kat and reports Kat's video for copyright violation
Kat is alerted to Bill's claim and can respond
Kat responds that Bill's claim is false
The server administrator receives notifications and contacts Kat and Bill to ask for further evidience, to resolve the situation appropriately

From: User:rhiaro

-1. see my comments on #Report_content — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Unless there is a generic feedback service that would be useful here, I don't think it's part of a social api. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 I'd unify this in a generic report story. This is just one different report type. --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I think these flows are probably pretty hard to standardize, especially for a first version. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 See my comments on #Report content; also agree these could be unified. Amy Guy (talk) 17:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 All of these "reporting bad behavior" stories should be unified. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 should include as part of report abuse, let's not API-ize DMCA takedowns. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 but agree with Tantek Çelik that we should "not API-ize DMCA takedowns." Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Report a User

Dan sends abusive messages to Pete, Liz, Jack and Jill
Pete reports Dan to the site administrator
Pete easily includes links to all of the abusive messages with the report
Liz reports Dan to the site administrator
Jack is hesitant about reporting Dan. Jack sees that Dan has already been reported by other users. Jack decides to support them by reporting Dan
Jill reports individually each of Dan's abusive messages
The site administrator receives notifications for each report
The site administrator can easily see the connection between Jill's content reports and the other user reports
The site administrator decides to suspend Dan's account and does so
Dan creates a new account 'Dan2', and resumes abusing Pete, Liz, Jack and Jill
Pete reports Dan2 and is able to indicate Dan2 is the same as Dan
The site administrator receives notifications and acts accordingly

From: User:rhiaro

-1. see my comments on #Report_content — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 as per previous Bill Looby (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. This is a lot for an API to handle. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Maybe this can be simplified, but I think it's important to think about how we're going to handle abuse early on. Amy Guy (talk) 17:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 ditto to Amy; ditto to my earlier comments about unifying "reporting" situations. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 report user is common and expected. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Invite friends to an event

Quentin RSVP 'yes' to invitation for API Days Berlin 2015
Quentin invites Jane, Jonas and Jill to that event
Quentin realizes that Jill went for a honey moon so he cancels the invitation for her
Jonas RSVP 'yes' to invitation and Quentin receives notification

From: elf Pavlik

+1. inviting to an event is a pretty common function — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implement (soon!). Amy Guy (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 In the enterprise, we use our calendaring / scheduling system for invitations. We do have events per group in our social tool, and one can send email to everyone in a group. But it's easier to manage scheduling via our main system. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:56, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk)

Reshare friend's ridesharing demand

Daniel posts on a wall of his online profile demand to share ride London -> Paris on 16-02-2015
Gwen publishes an offer to share ride with 2 other people when she will drive London -> Paris on 16-02-2015
Nadia re-shares Daniel's demand in two groups London Urban Gardeners and Paris Scuba Divers
Gwen finds this re-share of Daniel's demand in Paris Scuba Divers group, and replies with a link to her offer

From: elf Pavlik

-0 sems like a duplicate of other stories for resharing and commenting — Ben Roberts (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 as per above Bill Looby (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Just different content --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0. Seems like resharing as mentioned above. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Duplicate Amy Guy (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 I agree; seems like duplicate. Ann Bassetti (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 duplicate of repost without adding value. or if details are ride-share specific, then too edge case for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Invite another user

Alice has a friend who is not yet using the platform. She thinks he would like it
Alice uses the invite functionality to send an email invitation to Bob. In the invitation Alice specifies Bob should be automatically added once signed up to her Friends -contact list
Bob signs up with the link provided and is able to see Alice's content in her Friends -list

From: Jason Robinson

-1 Not sure how this would work distributed unless Bob happened to sign up to the same service as Alice, In which case its a custom feature of one specific service and doesn't involve the API. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Onboarding tends to be a specific service not always suitable for a generic API, but I think the concept is valid. Bill Looby (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 needs a lot of clarifications in terms of what we consider 'platform' — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. I think this is tough for an API to handle. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 I think this is app-specific not API (given that invitation will be for a specific app that implements the Social API) Amy Guy (talk) 17:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 on inviting others. -0 on that person being automatically added to my contacts list. Might just be my personal prejudice against having stuff happen automatically. I'd rather explicitly add someone to my Friends list. Also, in enterprise, we specifically want people to interact intentionally. We do not want some manager (e.g.) to upload their entire organizational list as "Friends". Ann Bassetti (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 not for v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 onboarding is important Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Define visibility of contact lists

Alice has a contact list called Friends. She allows these contacts to see who else is in this list
Bob is in Alice's Friends -list. He can see who else is in the Friends -list
Bob has a contact list called PHP Users. He does not want people in the list to see who else is in the list
Alice is in Bob's list PHP Users. She cannot see who else is in the list

From: Jason Robinson

+1 I like privacy controls on any data. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

0 I'm not sure this requires a specific API Bill Looby (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 but maybe we can integrate it with the previous contact lists story. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 But not sure if this is a duplicate: collection (of users) + access control. Amy Guy (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Seems useful in public, altho we do not hide connections in enterprise. (We maybe should, but don't, hide who's in a group, which seems related.) I wonder if this is a dupe, per Amy's comment. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 not for v1. keep "contacts" simply private. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Private Sharing

Ian wants to share a file with Jan
Ian posts the file file to his site with it set to only show to Jan.
Jan receives a notice that Ian has shared a file with her.
Jan views the file and decides to leave a thank you comment on the file for Ian

From Ben Roberts originally posted on ben.thatmustbe.me

+1 — Ben Roberts (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Kinda duplicate, a file is just another type of content? --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. Private posts are good. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Duplicate? - posts + access control (and an extra notification) Amy Guy (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 prefer direct messaging story instead. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

0 In the enterprise, we privately share files via email and file transfer via IM. In the public, I'm not well versed in the *social* options. Look forward to being educated! Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Contact Info

Milo just moved and wants to share his new phone number and address.
Milo views his Contact List and decides to share this information with only his "Close Friends" list which includes Olivia and Patrick.
Olivia opens her contact list and sees that she has Milo's phone number.
Patrick opens his contact list and sees that Milo updated his address and decides that this should overwrite the old address info from his contact list.
Quinn opens her contact list but sees that she does not have Milo's phone number.
Quinn requests Milo's contact info.
Milo is notified that Quinn has requested access to his contact info.
Milo decides to only share his phone number with Quinn and not his address.

From Ben Roberts originally posted on ben.thatmustbe.me

+1 — Ben Roberts (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 The use case is valid, but conditional sharing of profile pieces meets all the above and is already covered ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0. I'm not crazy about micro-managing profile data. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Duplicate? Updating profile is API and consuming profile data is API, but auto/triggered updating of local addressbook is app-specific job. Amy Guy (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Do you guys put this info in your social profiles? I don't, for privacy concerns. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned. In the enterprise this is all handled via corporate directory, from which our social tool takes a data feed. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't put my home address, but many people put their phone numbers privately in Facebook. Facebook used to export this data directly into your phone book for any friends that shared their phone number with you. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 21:26, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

+1 but privacy aspects need to be considered Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Group Messaging

Sergey wants to write Paula, Damien and Doreen about current issues.
Sergey is answering to several individual messages from each one, merging several individual conversations.
Sergey composes a message, selects the recipients and submits individually encrypted messages.
Paula, Damien and Doreen receive a notification of such received message.
Paula and Doreen write their answer together and send it together to Damien and Sergey. Both senders keep an individual copy of the sent message.
Damien writes an answer to Paula and Doreen only.
Paula answers Damien and Doreen, asking to make the message available to Sergey.
Doreen supports this request.
Damien gives his consent and adds Sergey to the messages audience.
Sergey unpublishes his initial message.
Paula, Damien and Doreen only have access to their answers and side conversation.

from Jon Richter

+0 Responding to multiple people is a pretty interesting case, but getting in to merging conversations can get complex, sounds more like UI territory. Composing a message together is something that I don't think makes sense. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Not a priority I believe Bill Looby (talk) 01:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I like private messages to multiple parties, but I'm not crazy about the conversation management aspects here. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 duplicate:pPosts + access control + notifications Amy Guy (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 too impractical in distributed architecture. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 A lot of possibilities, but seems complicated. Responding to multiple people, varying degrees of visibility, unpublishing, response to a sub-set ... gee, too hard to parse. Ann Bassetti (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 worth more discussion Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

RSVP and Check-in to event

Alice publishes an event.
Bob promises to come to the event and sends a RSVP request.
Alice confirms Bob's request.
Bob is reminded of the event and has already another obligation. Bob removes his RSVP.
Cécile promises to come to the event and sends a RSVP request.
Alice confirms Cécile's request.
Cécile checks-in at the event once it's happening to prove she took part.

from Jon Richter

+1 Check-in to an event is something I had not considered but I think is quite interesting. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Useful app feature, but too specific for a social api ? Bill Looby (talk) 01:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, I like the check-in which other stories leave out — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implemement but with posts and replies. Amy Guy (talk) 17:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 same as what Amy said. Have somewhat implemented. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implement, and have already implemented RSVP'ing to events. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Ditto on Bill Looby's comment. Plus, how is this diff from #Invite friends to an event? Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Fork from and Request Merge of Remote Content

Yung publishes a piece of text and asks for comments.
Frank comments inline and subsumes his annotations below, too.
Frank forks the text and makes some local changes, to support his arguments.
Yung receives a notification of the fork, because their domains vouched for each other.
Frank sends a Merge Request to Yung.
Yung receives a notification of the Merge Request.
Yung comments to the text changes inline and subsumes her arguments in the general comment stream, too.
Frank receives a notification of her comments and refines some arguments.
Yung receives a notification of the changes and accepts the Merge Request.

from Jon Richter

-1 Commenting in-line would be interesting but this is out of scope. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Bill Looby (talk) 01:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, we already collaborate with Annotations WG! — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Not sure how this is a part of Social API --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Too much. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Seems a stretch. Amy Guy (talk) 17:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is revision control, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Ditto on Tantek's comment. To elf: seems like we might explore if there is a distinction between general collaboration and "social". I think there is, but need to think about it. Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I agree with Pavlik elf Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Using custom types of Activity

Ben wants to use custom Activity type: Earned
Ben defines Earned as specialization of a core type: Achieve
Nina subscribes to Ben's stream with Achieve type of activities
Nine also now also receives from her subscription Earned type of activities

based on current work in Open Badges + xAPI

From: elf Pavlik

+1 Custom activities would be pretty important so long as it falls back to appearing as just a generic post. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Bill Looby (talk) 02:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I see the point, and Dret has been pretty adamant about it. Might be worth clarifying that the goal here is making consumers aware of the inheritance graph for action types. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 With fall back to generic/text post. Amy Guy (talk) 17:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 would avoid extensions in v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Would rather just fall back to generic text post and leave extensions until later. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Seems too much for v1, but then, I'm not driven by "badges". Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:07, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Receiving earned Badge

Sunny completes and online course 'Linked Data in Practice' at LD-Ninjas
LD-Ninjas generates a Badge 'Linked Data Explorer' for Sunny
Sunny accepts this Badge and stores it in her Personal Data Store

From: elf Pavlik

-0 Interesting but requires going in to some sort of authentication to prove that LD-Ninjas actually gave them this badge. I'd say this should wait for later versions of API. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 We may not need specific badge support but the APIs need to enable this use case for a badge providing service. Point 3 above may need refining as to what 'Personal Data Store' means Bill Looby (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Doesn't seem relevant for a first version --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 For 'giving' objects to users from a source (eg. another user). Amy Guy (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 badges have not done very well in practice. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Why are badges important to the social web? I have never consumed nor published badge information, nor ever actually taken any badge information seriously. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Not for v1. As I said above, I'm not attracted to badges. But we have internal sites that are exploring those possibilities for incentivizing particular behaviors. Makes me feel like a grouchy old coot. :-) -- Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Displaying earned Badge

Sunny joins W3C Credentials CG
Sunny chooses to display 'Linked Data Explorer' Badge earned from LD-Ninjas in her group profile
elf visits Sunny's profile at W3C Credentials CG and sees 'Linked Data Explorer' Badge

From: elf Pavlik

-0 Interesting but requires going in to some sort of authentication to prove that LD-Ninjas actually gave them this badge. I'd say this should wait for later versions of API. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 I think this is more complex and requires either or probably both of back end (badge property) and front end (badge display integration). Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, already worked on in Credentials CG and Badges Aliance — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Doesn't seem relevant for a first version --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 For displaying objects that have been 'given' to a user. Amy Guy (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 badges have not done very well in practice. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 (for reasons given above); but I am interested to explore Amy's idea. Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:11, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Photo sharing with event attendees

Ben creates an event
10 people who have never connected before RSVP to the event, including Zak
Afterwards Zak posts his photos from the event, and makes them visible only to people who RSVPed to Ben's event

From: User:rhiaro

+1 Sure, makes sense. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Probably a duplicate of multiple discussed stories, but should be made work Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Can it be visible to anyone who received the invitation, rather than only those who RSVPed? --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Will implement. Re: Evan - the idea was that Zak's photos are only seen by people he has now met; further could be they're only seen by people who checked in to the event; I guess it's up to Zak. It's distributed access control where Zak can select access rights for a group he didn't create directly. Amy Guy (talk) 17:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 would implement, but as with anything I post online, I would not assume the privacy of the content especially since the access control is not under my own control — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 As Bill Looby says, seems like this is combo of several other stories. Not worth figuring out which ones right now. The vast majority of events in our company are set up via email and calendar. Documents / photos would be shared via SharePoint 'rooms' (which includes wikis), maybe Virtual Collaboration Environments, or web. In our social tool, we set up events by groups, but doesn't handle the complexity of RSVPs, etc. -- Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Tagging a Post

Bob posts some Poetry on his site.
Charlie sees Bob's post and thinks it should be classified as under Poetry.
Charlie tags the post as Poetry.
Bob is notified of this suggestion and agrees to tag the post as Poetry.
Bob adds the tag Poetry to several other posts.
Dave visits Bob's site and views all posts tagged Poetry

From Ben Roberts

+0 Covered previously Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 duplicate? — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 The difference is "suggested tags"? --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Sorry, yes, probably duplicate. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 20:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Dupish. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Amy Guy (talk) 17:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

0 What's diff? Ann Bassetti (talk) 04:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Liking And Showing Likes

Aurora publishes a post
Buffy approves of the post so she "likes" it on her own site
Aurora receives a notification that Buffy liked the post
Aurora looks at the post and sees an increased count of likes
Aurora looks at who liked her post, and sees Buffy in the list of likes
later Buffy changes her mind so she removes the "like" from her own site
Aurora's post shows a decreased count of likes
Buffy looks at who liked Amber's post, and does not see herself listed there

From Tantek

Notes:

Silo (single-site limited) support of this user story exists in: Facebook, Twitter (favorites as likes), Instagram, etc.

+1 A little clearer but also duplicates #Responses, which after writing that so many times maybe #Responses should be removed and all the more direct user stories kept. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Mostly covered previously Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Would have been nice to have very exact user stories on the core stuff. Now lots is covered by the one "responses" :) --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Too much "on her own site" stuff. Please leave out the plumbing. Otherwise, collection of likes by subject and object is good. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Similar to #Responses Amy Guy (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I currently display likes and would like to implement notifications of likes as well. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 04:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 An additional aspect not mentioned is anonymous "likes". This is the model we have implemented. Adam Boyet (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

RSVPs invitations comments to an event

Summary keywords: event, RSVP tracking/maybe/yes/no/delete, comment, invitation (or invite)/accept

Cleopatra publishes a public event
Dawn sees the event and is interested, so she saves the event / replies as tracking it
Cleopatra is notified that Dawn is tracking the event
Cleopatra looks at the event and sees an increased count of people who are tracking the event
Cleopatra looks at who is tracking the event and sees Buffy in the list of trackers
Dawn decides she might be able to make it, and changes her RSVP to a maybe
Cleopatra is notified that Dawn might attend the event
Cleopatra looks at the event and sees an increased count of people who are might attend (and decreased count of tracking)
Cleopatra looks at who might attend the event and sees Buffy in the list of maybes
Dawn invites her friend Eve to also consider going to the event
Eve is notified of Dawn's invitation and excited about going with Dawn, immediately replies to invitation and event with RSVP yes
Cleopatra is notified that Eve is attending the event
Cleopatra looks at the event and sees an increased count of people who are attending
Cleopatra looks at who will attend the event and sees Eve in the list of attendees
Dawn is notified of Eve's RSVP yes in reply to her invitation
Dawn views Eve's RSVP and sees that Eve also put a smiley :) in her RSVP
Dawn commits to going to the event and changes her RSVP to yes
Eve is notified that Dawn, the person that invited her, is attending the event
Eve looks at the event and sees an increased count of people who are attending (and decreased count of maybes)
Eve looks at who will attend the event and sees Dawn in the list of attendees
Eve is excited to go to the event and posts a comment
Eve looks at the event and sees that her comment has shown up on the event
Cleopatra and Dawn are notified that Eve has commented on the event
Dawn posts a like of Eve's comment
Dawn looks at Eve's comment and sees herself and her like
Dawn looks at Eve's comment on the event and sees herself and her like
Eve realizes she has a conflict and changes her RSVP to no
Eve looks at the event and sees a decreased count of people who are attending
Eve looks at who has declined and sees herself in the list of declines
Dawn is notified of Eve's updated RSVP to no in reply to her invitation
Dawn does not want to go without Eve and changes her RSVP to no
Dawn looks at the event and sees a decreased count of people who are attending
Dawn looks at who has declined and sees herself and Eve in the list of declines
Eve decides she does not want the event in her history, so she deletes her RSVP
Eve looks at the event and sees a decreased count of people who are not attending
Eve looks at who has declined and does not see herself in the list of declines
Dawn comments on the event saying she maybe interested in similar events in the future
Dawn looks at the event and sees her comment, and Eve's comment since she didn't delete it
Dawn replies to Eve's comment and says maybe next time
Eve is notified of Dawn's reply to her comment
Eve decides to update her comment
Dawn is notified of Eve's updated comment
Eve decides to delete her comment instead
Dawn still sees both her reply to Eve's comment, and the context of Eve's comment, both on Dawn's own site, because she chose to keep context of her replies.

From Tantek

Notes:

Silo (single-site limited) support of this user story (except for "still sees" last step) exists in: Facebook

+1 Probably covered by other Stories but is very specific in covering use. As I have said before, I think we could really do from some generic extensibility of responses to Events rather than predefining a bunch. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 If this is mostly about the notifications, then should we really be mandating this ? - I would guess it's up to the implementing service, in which case this resolves mostly to management of responses ? Note : The use of 'changed RSVP' rather than Posted Acceptance, causes a different structural implementation, so I think this needs discussion Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I believe the 'changed RSVP' is because the RSVP was already set, not as posting acceptance. Basically it boils down to editing a comment. Benjamin Roberts (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. This is just too long. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 is this posts (where event is a post) + replies (rsvp + posts) + subscribing to a post (tracking event) + notifications? Amy Guy (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Too much in one user story to parse out. Adam Boyet (talk) 04:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 smaller stories please Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments And Showing Comments

Flora publishes a post
Gemma comments on the post using her own site
Flora receives a notification that Gemma commented on the post
Flora looks at the post and sees an increased count of comments
Flora looks at the comments on her post, and sees Gemma's comment
later Gemma changes her mind so she deletes the comment
Flora's post shows a decreased count of comments
Gemma looks at the comments on Flora's post, and does not see her comment listed there

From Tantek

Notes:

Silo (single-site limited) support of this user story exists in: Facebook, Twitter

+1 Again a duplicate of #Responses but it adds specification that Flora's post is updated of delete (API must notify original poster). I have already implemented this. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 as previous comment Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, needs clarification how it differs from other story — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I have implemented this except for deleting comments — Aaron Parecki (talk) 15:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. Duplicate of #Responses. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 #Responses plus deleting Amy Guy (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 is this similar to other user story about responses? Adam Boyet (talk) 04:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Share content with single individuals

Bob posts a dirty joke and makes it visible only to Carl.
Alice, which is following Bob, don't see the joke in her inbox stream, nor in Bob's wall

From: Fabio @ Friendica https://friendica.eu/display/324459233165649878554db0ac254729

Note, not really a duplicate of contact lists. This story relates to sharing with single individuals directly, without creating a list. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. I think this is pretty core. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. This is core, but is service defined rather than enabled by an API I would think (apart from the ability to target specific users) Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 --Jason Robinson (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+0. I think this is the same as #Direct Messaging. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:56, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 #Direct Messaging. Amy Guy (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Not sure if ACLs are needed in v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I have already been doing this for quite some time. No citations given for obvious reasons. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 #Direct Messaging Adam Boyet (talk) 04:39, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Duplicate? Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:11, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Profile visibility

Alice creates a profile for her business as a paid "dominatrix".
She makes this profile available to some of her selected customers (who do not have accounts on her server), but it cannot be seen by the boss at her day job at her church.

From: Mike MacGirvin at red#matrix, via private message

Didn't find a use case on profile visibility. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. This is different from just hiding a contact as the page itself is hidden. This creates an interesting problem for discoverability. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I think this is the same issue as discussed earlier. Multiple identities solves, and multiple associated 'sub-identities' gets complicated Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 I'd see this not as a sub-identity - it can be a whole different account. But the important key is that profile is not discoverable except by direct contact. Whatever that means in the actual API. For diaspora*, if we had hidden profiles, it would mean that the user would have to know the others handle (for example [email protected]). But going to view profile at http://example.com/users/foo would just bring up a 404. While this is an app issue for sure, it's also an API issue since the users must be able to set this visibility on her profile outwards to other instances storing the profile. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Implementing profile facets is too much for this API. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Access control for profiles. Amy Guy (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 impractical to do "cannot be seen by" specific people, if otherwise public. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 feels like multiple personas and adds too much complexity in initial v1 Adam Boyet (talk) 04:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Chat rooms

Jim creates a chatroom and provides access to Bill and Mary, neither of whom have accounts on Jim's server.

From: Mike MacGirvin at red#matrix, via private message

Not sure whether specific content is for talks here, but including as not sure.. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I think this could be accomplished with private posts and some special handling, but I believe it is out of scope for an inital revision. — Benjamin Roberts (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Way out of scope to me (apart from probable object type recognition in events) Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1, everyone uses Slack, HopChat, Gitter, you name it! we also use IRC in this very group... — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. Plumbing. Also, I think real-time chat is too much to handle for this API. That said, this might be #Group messaging in disguise. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-0 Is this just posts and replies, with a UI (ie app-specific function) that makes it instant? Amy Guy (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 this is IRC, not social web. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 while I love IRC, chat rooms are not social web. at least not yet. — Aaron Parecki (talk) 03:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 understand the value group chat can add to social collaboration but not for v1 Adam Boyet (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 chatrooms are social, inviting other people with accounts on other servers also is social Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Creating web pages

Bob create a webpage and makes it visible to Amelia.
Ruth visits the webpage and gets permission denied.
Amelia visits the webpage and can see it perfectly.

From: Mike MacGirvin at red#matrix, via private message

Not sure whether specific content is for talks here, but including as not sure.. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-1. Think this is just content support, not social Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. "Web page" can mean a lot of things. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Not sure about this. Just access control, out of scope of social? Amy Guy (talk) 18:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 The particular Access Control method is out of scope, but that there has to be one is evident. Therefore one has to build the social web so that this scenario is a reality. If it cannot happen then there is a big problem. Henry Story (talk) 21:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 to this user story as "creating web pages". I do believe to be out of scope. But as an integration of access control, i think this is important. Attempted an alternate story to that end Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories#Integration_:_Authorizing_web_page_access Benjamin Roberts (talk) 21:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 to "web pages" framing. dms/private posts could cover this differently already. Tantek Çelik (talk)

-1 Adam Boyet (talk) 04:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Moving of identities

Bob's service provider (abc.com.z) shuts down abruptly leaving him in a lurch.
He creates a new account at xyz.com.z from a thumb drive where his account was backed up.
He sends a post to all his friends - who are still friends with him.
He doesn't have to make friends with his friends all over again just because he changed servers.
He can also still see the photo on Alice's server.
Alice did nothing to change Bob's identity from abc.com.z to xyz.com.z on the photo - because it is visible to "Bob".

From: Mike MacGirvin at red#matrix, via private message

Including out of completeness. This is a huge subject and something we want to tackle within diaspora* too. red#matrix already handles this. Still, I don't see it as a very good candidate for a first version of a Social API. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. I agree I think it is out of scope for an initial revision since it gets to problems of proving that the new account is actually Bob, which gets into too much complexity for now. — Ben Roberts (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

+1. I'm 'plus one'ing this purely as I think we need to consider this so we don't do something that blocks it in the future even if specific support isn't added now. Bill Looby (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 — Pavlik elf (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 Henry Story (talk) 14:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC) A user should buy his own domain name, and not rely on other service providers. Then if his hosting provider shuts down he can just port all the data to another server, move the ip addresses and none of his friending relations will have changed. ( see the #Using_a_Smart_Client for an example. ) Otherwise the more interesting story is one where the service provider is well behaved and provides a redirect service to Bob's new server, so that Bob still does not loose any of his content or friends.

+0 Henry, not all users of social applications can surely be assumed to have their own domain? But anyway, not voting a strong +1 even though I think this is critical because of the sheer complexity. --Jason Robinson (talk) 20:12, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

-0. This is really hard to implement, and I think it's hard to make it work from an API. That said, GNU Social and pump.io users ask for this as a feature quite a bit. --Evan Prodromou (talk) 16:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+1 Porting content between servers is important. I see this as a way of reducing users-as-products and returning to users-as-customers of social providers, if users have the option to up and leave if their provider does something they don't like, which is not currently the case as investment in a provider is too high (ie you can't leave facebook without leaving your friends and content); I think it's extremely unfair to assume that social web users will be privileged enough be able to own their own domain. Amy Guy (talk) 18:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Henry Story (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Ok, change my previous -1 to +0. I have put up a story " Elegantly Moving Social Network provider" which I think should be the default behaviour in all future social web scenarios. This user story ("Moving of Identities") should be the exception. I think they both cover the same ground, but the other new one is wider ranging.

-1 way too complicated for a v1. Tantek Çelik (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

-1 moving of profiles between systems is important to us but not for v1 Adam Boyet (talk) 04:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

+0 Andreas Kuckartz (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2015 (UTC)