Define the role of participants as to prescribe (via semantics) the role in which contributions are made; to whom, by whom and explicitly how, why, in relation to and by whom such considerations are put.
Currently (or perhaps traditionally) identities have not linked easily between programmatically enveloped vectors. Therein, the role of contributing humans becomes vague; in-turn obfuscating the purpose, role and function of contributors; unnecessarily polluting semantics embodied within semantically notated contributions.
Consideration: Perhaps the consideration herein is service orientated fragmentation, vs. user-orientated fragmentation.
When designing a distributed or decentralised system, perhaps the predicate structure can assert differentiated views.
1. A Service
– I seek users of my service.
– I seek customers
– Users provide me data
– I Use data provided to my service by users to generate customers.
2. A Customer
– I pay for a Service
– I provide revenue for a Service
– The Service does something i am willing to pay to support my needs.
3. A Shareholder
– I am responsible for a Service
– I am involved economically in a service
– I derive Revenue from the Service
– I support the Service
– I Share in the benefit created by The Service.
4. A User
– I am a person
– I value my Privacy
– I prefer to direct my own life
– I am subject to The Rule of Law
– Money influences my life and survival
5. I am an employee
– I am a person acting for another.
– This may be deemed as an agent behaviour
– My role is defined; my ideology is secondary to the requirements of my role
– My role is defined for the purpose of supporting the development of the employers works
– An employer may be a Customer, Service, User or shareholder(s)
– I have legal obligations for another, as an Agent
Users have implicit ideologies, where some may be more debatable than others…
– Identity is important to my security
– I prefer to understand the Agreements i make with others
– Maintaining my Agreements is important to me
– I do not seek the law to be more or less accessible to me, than it is to others.
– I believe in human rights.
Services may also have ideologies
– These users are my agents.
– My Agents collect data i sell to my customers
– I believe my Customers are those who provide me money for the purpose of doing something specific for them, as a customer.
– If i give Users data functionality freely – like presentation, distribution and storage; they should let me do whatever i want, subject to law, with their data.
Similarly shareholders have ideologies
– A shareholder shall be entitled to shareholder benefits, such as free or discounted services;
– Any net profits generated by the organisation may be returned to shareholders by way of dividend.
– Members of the public shall be treated differently to shareholders
– only natural legal entities shall be entitled to be shareholders.
– governance of the organisation shall be appropriated by way of shareholder ballot.
– for the purpose of administration, different classes of shares shall be issued.
Similarly; customers have ideologies
– The fee required by the service provider shall provide a greater value of service than the provision of remunerative benefit to the service provider alone; being a sole consideration of ‘value’ provided forthwith, between the parties.
Employee’s have a role
– The role is defined in a way that may not conform to personal ideologies
– Employees may have duty of care for an organisation
– Employees have roles, in which they act as an agent
– Employee’s are persons, however they do not act as a person but rather as an employee
whereas a user, shareholder, service, customer or employee, or collectively ‘the parties’ enter into agreements for trade on a specified basis; this does not provide unfettered ‘license’ for any and/or all other purpose.
Herein; is a description of an ideological process embodied within an imaginary service. These forms of services are mechanically similar to that of many internet based data-services, where the delineation of ‘what is a customer’ and ‘what is a user’ is perhaps less clear than might be deemed ideal, for the purpose of ubiquitous engagement practices to services.
Questionably; schema definitions should support iterative definitions as to ensure the serialised readability of a role being beyond that of the context of requirements for a service.
In some forums, it is suggested that where ambiguity is allowed; interpretation of the implicit and explicit repercussions of these terms be construed to benefit the more vulnerable party.
Explicitly; society has evolved languages, communication systems and other mechanics of social-systems, as to enshrine usability, capability and support for the people, of their particular socio-economic and/or ideological precinct; and therein, requirements of that group – being to support growth and prosperity; therein, factors of flora, fauna and broader environmental influences becoming factors or facets of growth, prosperity and as an incumbent; terms of defining development.
WebID, and other manifest concepts of internet connected and communicated identity management systems; seemingly have difficulty in describing the role for which the identity service itself is furnished.
The term ‘denotes’ is used to suggest for instance; the term ‘agent’ denotes a ‘person’ or ‘actor’; however it seemingly does not state clearly, for which role or capacity they, as a person, are deemed an ‘agent’; nor does it clearly state that the term ‘agent’ is used to define the use of the document embodying the identity claims, for the purpose of acting as an ‘agent’ of the ‘person’ specifically.
Whilst it is reasonable to understand that expert technologists and/or other expert professionally qualified individuals within this specific area of information sciences; may reasonably determine and/or navigate solutions that appropriately reflect their own ideological views upon their lives, as influenced by membership and communications with communities – it is also reasonable to assume that the role of such people professionally, is not to necessarily enforce a particular ideology – other than that required by law – but rather, to facilitate the development of information science procedure, means and mechanism; as to entitle others with basic skills and related embodiments or usability; to discern the difference qualities of services made available; therein inclusive of, the terms of trade for which any such service is being offered.
Perhaps the ramification of this conceptualised differentiator; is the ability to describe terms, which are often legal in nature; in a manner that may be prescribed to an array of differentiated interfaces, selected by a user; for the purpose of interpreting and/or managing roles in relation to prescribed terms.
Reasonably; this may be deemed to be adjunct to the interests of incorporated entities, and the services provided by such entities to users, traditionally.
Therein perhaps the debate of; duty of care, may become a considered argument for why it is reasonably practical and beneficial for a service provider to deliver such a form of pragmatic user-definable service preferences, as a means to ensure the terms of trade are explicit and understood by the parties at the time of trade. Therein also; perhaps the desire to ensure a log is available, transportable and easily interpreted; outlining the use or communications between parties as is facilitated in relation to all parties, of which any party is involved when carried out digitally, involving an ‘agent’ of a ‘person’, or some-such definition closely defined in meaning or interpretation, as to outline the ideology of a person being made capable of managing their own influences upon others through any interpretative means communicated digitally.
– I Have a ‘personal’ Facebook Account
– I work for a company, my role includes works on ‘social media’
– I work for a Company. We publish materials online sourced from Public Relations Associates
– I work for a datamining company. We get Data from the Internet, so that we can sell analytics to customers
– I am a company. I get data from the internet sourced from users; which i then sell in the form of a product
– I am a bank. I have a fiduciary responsibility to provide you Banking Services.
– I am a Doctor. I require as much information about you, as possible, in-order to treat you, supporting your healthcare.
– I am a lawyer. I require legitimate information in-order to support your needs pursuant to the rule of law.
– I am a teacher. I will help qualify you in an area you want to learn, or can demonstrate that you know already.
– I am a contributor. I exist. I seek to make positive contributions.
– I am a person. My survival is valued more highly than most of my ideologies. I chose to strive towards the best possible contributions to the world, i am possibly made capable of supporting as an individual, with specific forms of communication skills, and capabilities to act, Make & Do.