RE: [kSum] Newsletter fore or aft April 2 webcast meeting?...

["JG Rae" <jgr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mark's suggestion is a step in the right direction for me.

Looking at the minutes, I see considerable common ground between the three
teams, and a couple of mistakes.

Common ground:

1) All three teams focused on activity (people wanting to do things with
content) supported by methods and tools.

2) Access, Find, Link : 3 teams, 3 verbs, but am I right in thinking we are
all looking at the consumer rather than producer ? Not necessarily the end
consumer, it could also be repackagers / compilers / remixers /editors
authors taking someone else's content as their input.

3) commercial and non-commercial services (don't assume one business model
works for everybody)

4) interoperability and respect for other standards initiatives


This all seems pretty positive IMHO

Mistakes (maybe mine):

Bob wrote down something I didn't actually say, but I agree with it anyway!
* Link people to people via content
* Link content to content via people
* Link people to content via people

Any combination of the three has meaning, I'd suggest. 

I don't remember anyone making the point in italics " Note: Kendra should
not define a new metadata standard, translation or toolset." I remember
saying that other metadata standards exist, and we should love them and
interoperate with them and not duplicate their good work.... 


My two cents worth:

1) Since we seem to be focusing on activity, I'd like people to come up with
some ideas about "things we want to do that better meta data / tools /
whatever would help us with"!
  
2) The search / find / link perspective means there is a niche in which
expect to complement existing standards. I remember Daniel's example ("make
it easy to find what I know I want") and Anthony's ("allow me to discover
things I had no idea existed".)

3) Let's be agnostic, or open to different interpretations of, "who pays"
and "who wants / needs to be paid". A good example for me is Muze, which
does something of great value to labels, but doesn't take revenue from the
labels.

4) see my comments under 2.

Best wishes to all,

Gordon Rae
  
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-k-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-k-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel Harris
Sent: 19 March 2007 20:25
To: k-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [kSum] Newsletter fore or aft April 2 webcast meeting?...

On 19/03/2007 10:08, Mark_Stuart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I am happy to propose an agenda before the end of this week based on the 
> minutes from the last meeting (or Wiki content) + some additional ideas 
> I have. People can then submit any changes/additions and we can finalise 
> the agenda around the middle of next week.
> 
> How does that sound?

Sounds great. Feel free to update and create new wiki pages as you see fit -
collaboration is the name of the game. That goes for everyone here too.

Cheers Daniel