Yep that make sense. I was thinking "edit own only" after that. It would be nice to explicitly allow editing of your content to others. However blips don't have participant level, merely authors. "edit own only" has been asked for many a time. It is perhaps a bit archaic/antisocial on it own but has it uses. With explicit control of editing that would be really versatile addition.
Also probably should be discussion about how AC is actually implemented. We have super users like public and they could have options, also users can have options, and the notion of who has to right to make changes to the AC, with the complication of the originator not necessarily being a participant. ________________________________ From: Arlen Beiler <arlen...@gmail.com> To: wave-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Fri, 22 April, 2011 13:08:01 Subject: Re: Access Control I agree. Read-only should definitely be the third. On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:43 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Read only? Personally I'd love per-wavelet level settings for > individual users but that might be quite complex for now. > > On 22 April 2011 10:47, Paul Thomas <dt01pqt...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Following Yuri's Poll I noticed that Access control wasn't listed other > then > > public waves. A while ago that issue was discussed. I'll admit I was > probably > > the first to caution. That is becuase I didn't want access control to > become > > inflexible by design, and I was theorising custom access control where in > a > > broader sense you are enabling interaction control. > > > > > > However I think at a more basic level it would be nice to have some of > the more > > common broader use cases. After private, public the next most desirable > access > > control (not suggesting pubic or private are exclusive of these). If > there are a > > handful of common access control options, that are implemented in such a > way > > that won't limit flexibility in the future, I think that will serve to > broaden > > WAIB's appeal. > > > > > > What would be the next desirable ACs? > > >
