Re: [projectvrm] Data Ownership Question

[Iain Henderson < >]

Yes, to be honest I think we'd benefit from sorting out the naming and  
defining side of things, including deployment options. In fact i'd  
probably go beyond that and suggest we'd all benefit from describing  
what is/ could be in it, and what it would enable for both individual  
and organisation. I also think the Dataportability project would  
benefit from such a dialogue in that when data is freed up through  
portability standards/ approaches, one of the places it could go to  
would be to a personal data store.

Does anyone on the list have the time/ energy to get involved in a VRM  
standards working group with the going in title of 'Personal Data  
Store Working Group' to tackle all of the above? If so, i'm happy to  
take the lead on that to get it up and running and throw in a stack of  
existing material to get us started.

(Trent, could you check this out with the DP group to see if there is  
interest in getting into this?).

Cheers

Iain

On 27 Aug 2008, at 17:13, Eve Maler wrote:

> What I've understood from the VRM usage of "personal datastore" is  
> that it's metaphorical, and not necessarily static at all.  In fact,  
> I don't think it will always literally store the data it manages.   
> As I discussed in my talk on Saturday (thanks to Sean for the kind  
> words on that -- more info is at http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog/publications/#gnomedex08) 
> , oftentimes you want to get a view onto the sharing patterns of  
> information that you don't have "write access" to, so what you're  
> looking at is some sort of virtual instance of it (a pointer to it,  
> or a pointer to a service that will hand it to you, or whatever --  
> there are several architectural options).  Keeping an eye on the  
> flow of *all* info about you is a "personal data analytics"  
> function, and I'd expect a PD to offer that.
>
> That said, if we're all agreed on what the "thing" generally is, but  
> want to find a more evocative name, I'm game. :-)
>
>         Eve
>
> On Aug 27, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Iain Henderson wrote:
>
> > Hi Adriana, it may well be that 'personal data store' is becoming a  
> > term that needs further definition (or ditched), because I  
> > certainly don't regard them as passive or static. When I use the  
> > term, I am referring to a capability that supports sourcing,  
> > managing and using personal data (i.e. very broad in scope with  
> > 'using' itself being a huge, multi-faceted set of functions).
> >
> > Another term used by some historically was 'personal knowledge  
> > bank', which I think implies more value/ more analysis and  
> > interpretation - but again each reader will have their own  
> > assumptions.
> >
> > Let's discuss at the VRM hub tomorrow?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Iain
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27 Aug 2008, at 10:39, Adriana Lukas wrote:
> >
> > > The 'ownership' of data, whatever that means, is merely a starting
> > > point. I might 'volunteer' information - to me that just means share
> > > it on my own terms - but the point is the ability to establish and
> > > maintain relationships. For that _I_ (others may not) need and want
> > > the following 'functionality':
> > >
> > > 1. take charge of my data (content, relationships, transactions,  
> > > knowledge),
> > > 2. arrange (analyse, manipulate, combine, mash-up) it according to  
> > > my
> > > needs and preferences and
> > > 3. share it on my own terms
> > > 4. whilst connected and networked on the web.
> > >
> > > That's what I meant about turning the individual into a platform,  
> > > etc etc.
> > >
> > > This does not happen by creating a database or a data store, however
> > > personal. Store implies passive and static, even with some sort of
> > > distribution. The objective is equipping individuals with analytical
> > > and other tools to help them understand themselves better and give
> > > them an online spring board to relationships with others (in VRM
> > > context this includes vendors).
> > >
> > > Adriana
> > >
> > > 2008/8/27  
> > > <
> > >  >:
> > > > I think there is a terminological / semantic issue here, Frank.  
> > > > Not a
> > > > substantive one.
> > > >
> > > > In the 'volunteered' information initiatives we are working on,  
> > > > the assumed
> > > > starting point - the sine qua non - is 'value participation' for  
> > > > the
> > > > individual.
> > > >
> > > > We chose the word 'volunteered' to underline this point: it's  
> > > > entirely up to
> > > > the individual whether or not they provide this information: it is
> > > > entirely voluntary. If organisations want to access this data  
> > > > they will have
> > > > to accept the individual's terms and conditions, including a  
> > > > clear benefit
> > > > to the individual.
> > > >
> > > > We've struggled long and hard to find a better word than  
> > > > 'volunteered' but
> > > > so far, every other word seems to create worse problems.
> > > >
> > > > Any ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Alan M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > The network is always stronger than the node...
> > > but a network starts with a node.
> > >
> > > http://www.mediainfluencer.net
> > > http://www.bigblogcompany.net
> > > http://www.samizdata.net/blog
> > >
> > > Background:
> > > http://www.mediainfluencer.net/about/
> > >
> > > Skype: adriana872
> > > UK mobile: +44 787 6757129
> > > US mobile: +1 732 447 5115
> >
> > Iain Henderson
> >
> >  
> >
> > This email and any attachment contains information which is private  
> > and confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are  
> > not an addressee, you are not authorised to read, copy or use the e- 
> > mail or any attachment. If you have received this e-mail in error,  
> > please notify the sender by return e-mail and then destroy it.
>
> Eve Maler                                         +1 425 947 4522
> Principal Engineer                            eve.maler @ sun.com
> Business Alliances group                    Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Iain Henderson

 

This email and any attachment contains information which is private  
and confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are  
not an addressee, you are not authorised to read, copy or use the e- 
mail or any attachment. If you have received this e-mail in error,  
please notify the sender by return e-mail and then destroy it.