PUBLIC MARKS with search contract

# There are meaningful “entry points” into the app - URIs. (No, I’m not going to mention the R-word.) It’s simply entirely unacceptable for a Web app to expose only a single URI, break the “Back” button, and disallow linking. Frameworks that don’t support URIs for application concepts, such as every customer, order, contact report, document etc. should simply be banned.

# Application boundaries are a concern to developers, not users. The Web is about linking stuff together, without any concern about application boundaries. There’s absolutely no reason why you shouldn’t be able to follow a link in your CRM application that takes you to a product page in your online catalog, or from a customer record to the information about when they last logged in to the Web site, or from a page that’s part of a complex business process UI to the appropriate documentation and on to the discussion group where you can tell everybody how much it sucks.

# Documents are accessible in a standard way. The idea of accessing any kind of document, such as an insurance application form that’s been scanned in, a letter sent to a business partner last year, or a contract with a business partner, by any other means than an HTTP GET is just stupid.

Departing Madrid early on a Sunday morning, I found this paper map of the Metro, tucked neatly within the seams of a pre-fab wall, ready for re-use. I wondered, who was on their way out of Madrid, thinking that they could not in good conscience throw away their worn map, looking about for a way to pass it along to another visitor.

Another instance of a Thoughtful Act.

Why do I blog this? Sudden interest in observing improvisatory social practices which are signals of a sort, not always of a “service” or designed object to adopt that practice into a commodified instantiation. But sometimes merely a curiosity that helps us better understand who we/people are, like waypoints along a contour of individual and collective humanities.

the interesting thing with the map offered here is that it is an pseudo anonymous gift. At an instant t when the map has been put, the local people around the person may have identified the gesture and see the person (unlikely but let's say they have at least seen the act) BUT the people who will benefit of it in the further instant have probably no connection at all with the source.

A signature (automatic or not) defines a contract that tie to all kind of responsibilities and legibility which are not necessary beneficial for the group as large. The anonymous nature is defined by the time span and the a-connection between the two events (giving the map/receiving the map). Both gestures will be locally identified but the odds of being connected very small. On the Web, the odds of connection are very high and change completely the social dynamics of giving and sharing information. The network has a "memory" of the context.

Taking my data and sharing it with a third party without my permission isn't cool. Just because I shared information with you doesn't give you the right to share it with others.

Research Associate/ Software Developer Department of Physics and Astronomy Salary Grade 7 - £28,289 to £32,796 per annum Available from 1 January 2008 Fixed Term Contract for 18 months Ref: R3527 The Department is seeking to appoint a Research Associate / Software Developer to work on the SKUA project (Semantic Knowledge Underpinning Astronomy). This JISC-funded project will implement a distributed architecture of semantically aware RDF stores, and demonstrator applications building on it. This ‘semantic layer’ will support a cluster of applications which will both directly support users in finding and recovering useful astronomical resources, via the International Virtual Observatory Alliance; and indirectly support users by supporting user-facing applications.