MW4D bi-monthly call

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mw4d/2010Sep/0000.html

actions

http://www.w3.org/2010/08/23-mw4d-minutes.html#ActionSummary

<NicolasC> Hello there, Nicolas from TNO on IRC only apology for the late arrival

ok

action around creating pages on the wiki

http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/Main_Page

4 more pages

one on I18N

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/madrid/cfp

one on education, banking, agriculture

max: relation with stories

<shwetank> Hi - Shwetank Here on IRC only ... on slow connection here. Im trying multiple times to connect but having problems .... Will be present on IRC though

steph: stories==use cases

here more a note mapping actors of the domain, type of tasks, tools and process etc

Tools

http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/wiki/Mw4d_tools

stephR: incorporated feedback from the last discussion

added a section about criteria to select tools

which tools should we consider

just a page header not content, but needs to be developed

stephR: split end-user and people deploying tools

didn't get comments so far

comments ?

<maxf> steph: like organisation by target. Also services providing information and getting information (push or pool) is an important dimension.

<maxf> … not sure where to capture it.

<maxf> … also licensing: should probably be stripped. Different between using a tool that's free or not, or whether it's open source or not

<maxf> … when we come to open source, there are also other dimensions like communities behind tools, releases, etc.

<maxf> … also about hosting: on a computer, on the web, on a phone, in the cloud

<maxf> … also to know if a tool is a software package, or a service

<maxf> … eg clickatell is a service, but frontlineSMS is a software package. Ushahidi is now both

<maxf> … last comment: 2nd table seems to be missing a section around end-use profile: language, illiteracy and other requirements on the user.

<maxf> … also you should launch a specific discussion section about it

<betty> Has someone tried to map a tool or several tools with tool review methodology? It can check how feasible the methodoloy is.

<maxf> stephanierieger: we haven't done it yet. I suggested 2 tools, possibly 3, so we can compare them

<shwetank> How about we take that as the next step? mapping tools to these criteria as betty pointed out ... might get more insights on what to add or edit?

<maxf> … no one answered yet.

<maxf> maxf: what sort of tool is it?

<maxf> Steph: in my view, there are 2 families of tools. One is the SMS hub (gnokki, frontlinesms, rapidsms)

<maxf> … might be a good guinea pig for testing

<maxf> … other family I had in mind is data collection tools

<maxf> … SMS forms, openRosa, web tools, etc.

<maxf> … that's a likely good candidate.

<maxf> Betty: on the wiki page, twitter and facebook are mentioned. Are we going to consider them?

<betty> Thanks Max.

<maxf> Steph: personally I would focus on the kind of social networks can be enabled, not the ones existing.

<maxf> … looking at what kind of services they enable, rather than what they are.

<maxf> … happy to start the discussion here. It's important for me tools that provide services and information to people

<maxf> … certainly there are families of tools we can consider, like social networks.

<maxf> … as a family of functions. Then specific ones like Mixit in Africa, for instance.

<stephR> I wonder if we will be able to use the same criteria to assess social networks as they rely on 3rd parties (hosting, roadmap etc.) substantially more than other tools

<maxf> [big gap in minuting, sorry]

<stephR> yes

business model

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mw4d/2010Sep/0001.html

http://public.webfoundation.org/2010/08/mobile_enablers

structure of domain specific pages

<maxf> Steph: I created a couple of pages specific to education, banking and agriculture.

<maxf> … most people interested aren't here today

<NicolasC> specific on business models?

<maxf> … wanted to check if anybody has feeling on what to put in those pages

<NicolasC> first I guess we should try to identify business models that work potentially per sector

<maxf> … Interesting to see what actors are involved, usual profile of those actors. For instance we've worked with farmers in Burkina and other countries, and they often have the same profile, making them appropriate for families of technology

<maxf> … will look at it for agro.

Nicolas, we decided that we will have the discussion at the next meeting

so good if you can attend

<NicolasC> oups I missed that line

<maxf> maxf: health?

<maxf> Steph: for now pages are created from people's interests.

<maxf> … if there are expressions of interest on health, of government services, then we can create more pages.

<stephR> what you've suggested sounds good: common tasks, concepts, profile of actors, case studies, examples of existing litterature/research on the topic

betty: good to make links with the stories

good start

betty: added introduction

<shwetank> question: there maybe some companies or tools, the success of which is still undecided....should be include them in case studies or not?

<shwetank> *should we

shwetank: i think that's a good question

we debated earlier on the criterai for selecting tools

so we will bring that to the agenda next time too

<shwetank> great, looking forward to it

Next Meeting

<stephR> ok for me

<NicolasC> which topic then?

<stephR> not for me

so at least business model

impact analysis

<betty> 13 Sep is OK, not 27 Sep

nicolas, is September 13 ok for you ?

<NicolasC> yes

great

<shwetank> 13 is better for me too

great

resolution: next meeting september 13