21 messages in com.googlegroups.opensocial-and-gadgets-specRe: Proposal for Privacy Settings as ...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Na Li | Oct 12, 2011 2:23 am | |
| Laurent-Walter Goix | Oct 13, 2011 3:29 am | |
| rbaxter85 | Oct 13, 2011 6:38 pm | |
| Na Li | Oct 20, 2011 4:37 pm | |
| Na Li | Oct 20, 2011 4:45 pm | |
| James Snell | Oct 20, 2011 6:10 pm | |
| James Snell | Oct 20, 2011 6:10 pm | |
| rbaxter85 | Oct 23, 2011 1:05 pm | |
| Na Li | Oct 24, 2011 5:24 am | |
| rbaxter85 | Oct 24, 2011 6:18 pm | |
| rbaxter85 | Oct 25, 2011 12:13 pm | |
| Mark W. | Oct 28, 2011 6:40 am | |
| Mark W. | Oct 29, 2011 1:13 pm | |
| rbaxter85 | Oct 30, 2011 6:49 pm | |
| Na Li | Oct 31, 2011 10:21 am | |
| Craig McClanahan | Oct 31, 2011 10:39 am | |
| Craig McClanahan | Oct 31, 2011 10:39 am | |
| Na Li | Oct 31, 2011 10:51 am | |
| Mark W. | Nov 1, 2011 5:23 am | |
| rbaxter85 | Nov 1, 2011 6:14 am | |
| Na Li | Nov 1, 2011 9:28 am |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for Privacy Settings as an OpenSocial Extension | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | rbaxter85 ("rba...@gmail.com) | |
| Date: | Oct 25, 2011 12:13:59 pm | |
| List: | com.googlegroups.opensocial-and-gadgets-spec | |
Na, we missed you on the call today, but we did talk about this a little.
I will try to summarize what we talked about....
For people we didn't think restricting the information from your profile was a valid use case. We thought this was a container operation that the user performed, and then the container would just not return this information.
For the other social data objects we found trying to introduce privacy settings into them would get ugly and would overlap with other efforts at this point. Maybe you can elaborate more here if you disagree. The next week we are having a discussion on CMIS, and the following week we are canceling the call because we have the social business jam that day.
On Oct 24, 9:19 pm, rbaxter85 <rbax...@gmail.com> wrote:
I added you to the calendar invite. I usually send out the call in information on Tuesday.
On Oct 24, 8:24 am, Na Li <jian...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Ryan,
Sure! I am glad to join. How do i participate?
Na Li React group, EPFL CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
On Oct 23, 8:05 pm, rbaxter85 <rbax...@gmail.com> wrote:
OK I think I see what you are saying Na. As James pointed out the audience targeting spec would see to address or at least be related to the privacy concerns you are trying to address.
Also there is going to be a push to integrate CMIS into the OpenSocial spec which, as Laurent-Walter, points out may also address some privacy concerns. This may only apply to Albums and Media Items.
There may be some social data objects that wont be covered under the two specs above. This may be a good thing topic to discuss at one of our Tuesday office hours, would you be interested in joining?
-Ryan
On Oct 20, 9:11 pm, James Snell <jasn...@gmail.com> wrote:
Audience Targeting for JSON Activity Streams (Draft)
- James
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Na Li <jian...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello rbaxter85,
As i see in OpenSocial Spec 2.0, the audience of the activity entry is not included. There is a filed "target" for activity entry, but it doesn't describe the audience though. In the case of "Alice added a photo in her album", the target refers to "her album".
We think that including sharing audience of the activity can help to generate more intelligent notifications, news feeds, etc...
Na Li React group, EPFL CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
On Oct 14, 3:38 am, rbaxter85 <rbax...@gmail.com> wrote:
Can't you already target specific activity stream entries and messages to a specific user(s)?
On Oct 13, 6:29 am, Laurent-Walter Goix <laur...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Na Li,
Thank you for sharing the proposal. Interesting topic to be addressed, related to permissions and ACLs...I guess the proposal captures good concepts (the fact of addressing privacy levels to the granularity of fields), and may deserve some additional "behavioural" rules on how to process them from a server perspective (e.g. you may end up with overlapping, hierarchical or conflicting settings if you combine several entries together for the same piece of information)
have you also been checking the work done in ActivityStreams [1] or CMIS [2] on this? Where do you think this should be best addressed? walter
On Oct 12, 11:23 am, Na Li <jian...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Our research group at EPFL would like to propose a privacy setting extension for OpenSocial. Every social networking site provides a particular privacy control scheme that manages the sharing audience of different social data, including profile information, activity streams, albums, and media items. However, privacy settings of social data is not included in OpenSocial specification up to the current version.
We believe that for gadgets, being able to retrieve the privacy settings of social data can keep users aware of the sharing audience of their information and give them the control over who can access their data. We propose to add a new data structure PrivacySettingEntry into Social Data and add PrivacySettings attribute to Person, ActivityEntry, Album, and MediaItem.
The example use cases and proposed Spec changes are described in the proposal:https://docs.google.com/document/d/12UH0Dolvd5A1lEAQatez9CbdHgpysfvWe...
Please let me know if you find this extension useful. We are ready to contribute and look forward to your feedback.
Best,
Na Li React group, EPFL CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to
open...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
opensocial-and-gadgets-spec+unsu...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/gro