Übersicht Letzte Änderungen Letzte Änderungen in der Umgebung KurzAnleitung Blog RSS

TelePresence

TelePresence allows individuals to broadcast their social signal on the Internet. TelePresence is a service available online.

Your “telepresence signal” answers five questions:

TelePresence here could be considered as simple adaptation of the traditional phone/chat availability signal working on usual instant messaging clients.

http://www.skypejournal.com/blog/archives/images/presence.jpg (source)

Uses / Benefits

TimeWindow. [ting]. Synchronous conversations. Invitation to Augmented teleconferences (FlashMeeting?). You remain available if you cooperate on several hang out.

Discussion

[fr]Sur un wiki, il y a peu de possibilités pour une conversation synchrone à deux ou plus. Mais on peut indiquer non seulement qui a contribué à un wiki, mais aussi qui a lu une page sur le wiki – les visiteurs récents sont disponibles sur Oddmuse aussi [1] (même si la plupart des visiteurs sont anonymes). La question est donc : Quoi-faire avec l’information téléprésence sans moyen d’en profiter ?

[fr]Merci Alex pour ce lien. Superbe fonctionnalité très complémentaire des indicateurs de disponibilité synchrones. Pratique pour pratiquer une peu d’aide ou support d’un groupe en temps réel ou accélérer une prise de décision [2] quand le groupe est perdu ?

[en]JabberConférence? is really useful to accelerate some decisions. I really believe in the convergence Wiki + IM to enable, facilitate and emulate collaboration ? Could we speak also here of the perspectives of Voice on Wiki ?

[fr]Un des ces jours il faut que tu nous visites sur #wiki à irc.freenode.net (IRC) [3]. On n’est pas beaucoup (encore), mais je pense que la convergence de Wiki + IRC marche très bien pour #emacs et http://www.emacswiki.org/ – alors pourquoi pas sur #wiki et http://www.communitywiki.org/. Ce qu’il nous faut, peut-être, c’est une signalisation de qui (parmi les gens sur CategoryHomepage) est sur #wiki au moment sur ce wiki-ci. Serait-ce la “TéléPrésence?” comme tu te l’imagines ?

[en]Yes Alex. I think so ;) Not really used to IRC. AvailibilityDetector? pehraps or TéléDisponibilité? could help me to join you… I still don’t know. Still searching the relevant WikiWord.

Got myself a jabber account, too… kensanata@amessage.ch…


On a wiki, there are few possibilities for a synchronous conversation with two or more. But one can indicate not only who contributed to a wiki, but also who read a page on the wiki – the recent visitors are available on Oddmuse too [4] (even though the majority of visitors are anonymous). The question is thus: What does téléprésence give us when we don’t really need it? – AlexSchroeder, as translated by Babelfish and LionKimbro

Personally, I think one difference between TelePresence and RecentVisitors is that with TelePresence, if I’m browsing some other wiki for the moment, I’m still available to the people on the first wiki. – LionKimbro

I agree Lion. TelePresence and RecentVisitors are very complementary. Currently testing the uses for small groups and awaiting reactions. Would be interested to know more. On a personal point of view, I’m not a jabber addict. Just feel that TelePresence mixed with DerniersVisiteurs? (RecentVisitors) could be great and useful for wiki-animation in WikiFractality ? – ChristopheDucamp

It sounds interesting and might make communication more fluent and therefore should be tried out. I have jabber but it’s all new to me. – MattisManzel

[en] Teleprésence has never worked on craowiki… the plugin was too complex. The idea could be to integrate TelePresence in an AutomaticSignature? combined with DenotingAuthor :

  • How about moving this page on a big bucket like SocialSignal? composed of :
    • WhoIsOnline ? like this skype presence http://24.71.69.5:88/stuart_henshall.png or jabber http://edgar.netflint.net/status.php?jid=xtof@rahan.crao.net&type=image&iconset=frickenhuge&fake=.png
    • RecentVisitors [5]
    • WhoIsAvailable? to invite people to share a ting (TimeWindow)
    • WhereAreWePage? (declarative or could be automatic with an opt-in via mobile and gps/galileo?)

Could we imagine such a WikiAsCollage on a googlemap.


Just as a beginning. To show TeamSpeak presence should be possible as well.

The french friends think about it already - crao-wiki: téléprésence.

I’ve heard rumblings that the cell phone folk (& telco in general) are interested in presence.

I don’t know their timetables, and don’t even remember where I heard this from, so relay the lack of confidence when you communicate it to someone.

Skype’s presence don’t seem to work anymore ? Currently working with the openwengo (coip/voip) application [6] (features of TelePresence, open-source and far better in sound quality from Skype). I plan to meet them next week to try to deal a sponsorship for our french internet fiesta. Just tried to search on the wiki [7] but still not found any way if there’s a way to display the “presence signal” as mentioned in the image above with skype… What could be the word ?

Another interesting application I just tested is SocialSignal?[[8] Signal-Social allows you to broadcast your personalized status on the Internet to your friends, but also to check out their status. You thus can keep in touch with the people whom you have added in “Your contacts”. Still did not know if it could be interested in any of our SuperProject but I think it deserves to be mentioned to deliver an asynchronous mood TelePresence over the net. Could we consider SocialSignal? as the future of TelePresence ?

A super-wiki TelePresence could display a small electronic post-it-web mixing both :

  • a presence signal,
  • a localization,
  • AppropriateMedia to be contacted
  • mood (emoticon)
  • a few words extracted somewhere in the wiki from your personal page.

In such a way, we could imagine a DenotingAuthor feature becoming HyperSocial.

Finally, I think this page suffers from a serious LackOfReworking. I could try to do my first refactoring elsewhere. Where ?

What do you think of SocialSignal? taken as a wikiword ?

Please excuse my english. This page is becoming a real mess. It belongs now to PagesThatNeedReworking’s club. I’ll try to do my first refactoring attempt soon. Anyway, I would be happy to discuss of such opportunities during a future “ting”. Feeling a bit sleepy now to write a BulletSummaryBlock. zzzZZZ.

Heh; I really wish all the presence systems were consolidated..!

That’s in desktop-land, I think. Though, MiguelDeIcaza?, of the Gnome project, has expressed sympathies for doing desktop-level stuff over HTTP…

Hm; Maybe presence should just always work through HTTP. Then it’s just a matter of putting together a standard, and broadcasting. :)

Someone runs a program on their desktop, the program opens up a port, or can talk with a remote server that hosts your presence info…

…hmm,..!

I think the Jabber protocols already exist, actually. This could all work over Jabber.

I haven’t given this enough thought; I suspect the infrastructures already there.

I think I just need a simple Jabber-presence-to-graphic converter.

I finally got around to installing Skype and … What is this?

Could we find any solution to display a nice TelePresence in the “current contributors” section ? May I suggest an InterWiki link : I think it could be easy for all of us to enter jabber:username/ openwengo:username, skype:username, etc. just to display our SocialSignal?.

Sorry to butt in, but I might siggest using images as presence indicators. Then you’d just change the image (served by a separate script). I believe a jabber bot called Edgar allows you to do something like this. Of course the coolest way would be to use js to dynamically update the page :). – RadomirDopieralski

Agree: Use images for presence. We just need an image source that’s keyed into our various presence signalers. A ContentRouting problem.

I’d love to understand the presence thing, and can wait until it’s technically worked out. I use gmail so have google talk automatically. This is jabber, yes? So would that serve as my CW presence? Can we do this? I love the idea!

I don’t know how to talk with the gmail jabber servers; I don’t even know it’s address..!

I’m saying we should all use multi-protocol chat clients, eg. Gaim for Windows and GNU/Linux systems or Adium for Mac OSX systems.

http://www.emacswiki.org/alex/pics/adium.png

I kind of like the idea of building some presence into the website. People who visit the site occasionally but not enough to add all of us to their clients will still be able to see the presence info that way.

It looks to me like Edgar takes care of everything. You just include an IMG tag and it does the rest. The IMG tag specifies the Jabber account. Here’s an example: http://edgar.netflint.net/status.php?jid=fritzy@netflint.net&type=image&.jpg

I think that people who don’t have a Jabber account can use a Jabber bridge to create a Jabber proxy for an account on another IM network.

However, it seems to me there’s one problem: spam. Do you really want to list your jabber ID publically within an image tag on the CommunityWiki sidebar? It’ll get collected by spambots eventually.

I’d add a tag for myself, but I’m not on IM much so I dunno if it would do any good to add a tag for me.

I added a tag for myself, because I’m basically online all the time, even if I rarely use my chat client.

It says “jid=kensanata(a)gmail.com” – does that mean that- you can talk with Gmail over Jabber? Like, if I have a user account with jabber.com, or whatever it is, that I can Jabber w gmail people?!

I thought they both ran Jabber, but that their networks weren’t connected. If they’re connected, that’s awesome! But is it so?

Jabber has an architecture similar to e-mail – you can’t really say that e-mail servers are connected or not – they connect when they need to exchange messages. All they need is an address and a common protocol. It’s really cool.

As for displaying the presence – there are several projects, like JSJaC or Smack that could be included on a web page. – RadomirDopieralski

Lion, Gmail has an interface with Google Talk – so even if you don’t have a chat client, you will be seen as being online on GTalk if you read your Gmail via the web interface. If you are on Windows, you can use the special GTalk client to chat, or you can use any other Jabber client and use your Gmail user account as your account on the GTalk server. And finally, you can be logged into any Jabber server and chat with people logged into GTalk. I think. :)

If you read your Gmail via POP, you will not have noticed, of course.

How do we make Edgar’s icon clickable in a way that someone can use it to send us a message? Otherwise, I’m not sure what good the indicator does us.

Looking at the list above, I guess it answers the question “are you available?” – but it answers none of the others. As for clickability… I dunno – is there a an URL schema for jabber? I know there is one for AIM (aim:kensanata) and Jabber (jabber:kensanata@gmail.com). However, I haven’t found the real docs for either, and at the moment neither is a recognized protocol by Oddmuse.

It turns out that I’ve never used these TelePresence indicators on our SideBar. Do they really make sense?

I turned off mine, because it was always on, regardless of whether I was on or not.

I think presence information is potentially useful, but that it should be condensed: perhaps a 3x3 pixel square that shows whether the person is on or not, and what their status is. If I roll the mouse over the square, I’d like to see their away message. If I click on it, I’d like to (somehow?!) send them a message. Perhaps there’s another web service we could hook into?

But more than just “is the person online or not,” I’d like to know is the person “here” now!

I know a lot of times, I see that someone else is here, at the same time as me. But I cannot talk with them!

For instance, Mattis Manzel is on, as I write this. But there’s no way I can reasonably expect to communicate with him.

I particularly want to know: Who gave a hit 1-5 minutes ago? I want to know: Did someone start a page within the last 20 minutes, and if so, who was it, and what’s the tentative page name? And I want to be able to send a message directed to that person, publicly visible, in a chat box.

To be able to watch people, but not communicate with them by messaging- it’s an almost surreal experience.

I wrote on RequestsForAlex with an idea about how Alex might be able to implement a chatterbox in a “wiki-like” way. (That is, making a box that appends a line to the end of the page, along with username.)

Hmm. To me it rather feels like we should use existing real-time communication tools and cleverly show people’s presence indicated on our wiki than to somehow drill up community-wiki to real-time. But I miss the technical understanding, so ignore.

The possible real-time commuication levels are

  • an irc chanel - most simply. Why don’t we have freenode #community-wiki? You are all scattered over different chanels and I hardly ever get hold of anybody when I want to. Is what we are doing not important enough? The chanel #onebigsoup did it for some time, but lion’s not idleing there anymore. Creating this chanel would be the easiest, the first and the most natural thing to do. Having indicated on the wiki who is loged in this chanel would be useful.
  • a standalone gobby server - sobby (mutante tried it on s23-wiki some months ago and it didn’t work - a segmentation error -, but maybe it does now in the new gobby version?). Having indicated on our wiki who is present and active on a gobby page would be useful. Irc #community-wiki should be hacked into the chat part of gobby. I poked the gobby-folks on this. A great deal of our writing could be first done in gobby, allowing real-time collaboration. An hour or so later when it’s “ready” we export the text to community-wiki.
  • a standalone VoIP server. Proprietary TeamSpeak seems the best solution to me at the moment. Wengo might follow? Having indicated on the wiki who can be reached by pushing your button and talking would be useful. This takes a bit of learning, as it’s easy to get on peoples nerves by disturbing them. Once learned this lesson it’s most useful.

Just my current ideas about it. Every user three presence lamps: irc, collab-editor, VoIP.

I vote for IRC – most instant messaging clients also have IRC capabilities – eg. Gaim. Let’s meet on #communitywiki?

No.

No, no, No!

I feel very strongly about this!

Here’s why.

  • For whatever reasons, IRC “doesn’t work” for me.
    • I hate turning on IRC clients.
    • I hate having to “log in” to IRC.
    • I hate having to leave an IRC client open.
    • I hate the space it takes up in my windows process listing.
    • I hate checking IRC.
    • I hat just the cost of a few stray thoughts per day that have to do with IRC or it’s mechanics and levers.
    • In the end, I just plain don’t do it.
    • For whatever reason, IRC just doesn’t work for me and my workflow.
  • Because pulling up IRC clients is so time consuming and out of the way, we idle.
    • And because we idle, IRC “presence” information is useless. It’s like the light on next to my name that is always on. All you know is that a computer is on. You don’t know anything about whether there’s actually a person there or not. Much less know if they are interested in a specific page on CommunityWiki or not.
  • What about our OccasionalContributors? What about HansWobbe or HelmutLeitner? Is everybody really going to hang out in IRC all the time? And what about new people? What about the person who’s just dipping their toes in the water, of CommunityWiki?
    • An initial interactive session with us could dramatically increase a sense of trust and involvement. At the very least, it could help them figure out if this is their sort of place or not. But do we really expect everyone’s going to (A) download an IRC client, then (B) join our channel, and then (C) start talking with us, just because… …(because what? Why would they think to do that?) But if we could all see each other here, (presence in CW based on recent actions,) and if we could just send chat through this website, then all those problems are solved, and we have newbie-interaction, and we have interaction with the people who don’t feel like maintaining an open channel on #communitywiki.
  • People who are just passing by can’t OverHear our conversation, either, because it’s in a totally different space.
  • When I see someone else who is actively present on CommunityWiki, immediately, and when I have something that I think they’d be interested in, then that is exactly when I want to catch their attention, and talk with them.
    • That is: I want to initiate interaction with someone when they are looking at a page we share interest, and by the medium they are immediately using..! It’s got to happen at the right time, at the right place. Otherwise, we have an IntelligenceFailure.
    • The right time is when they’re reading a page of mutual interest, and the right place is on the very medium they’re looking at.
    • If the first contact is used solely to initiate conversation in another space (phone, VoIP, Gobby, IRC, whatever,) that’s fine. But you have to have that launch pad, to start from. No launch pad, no interaction. The launch pad is just as necessary to getting to the moon, as the booster rockets.

Let’s say I write a comment on PICA.

Then I notice, a little later in the day: Whoah! BayleShanks is here, and reading PICA, right now!

At this point, I want to put a little message on the wiki: “Hey, Bayle! What do you think?”

That is, I want to intercept what would be a line of comments going back and forth over a long period of time, and replace it with an interactive back-and-forth. (Because it’s more efficient: no misunderstandings.)

(Further, I’d like that conversation to be publicly visible and reworkable.)

What’s not going to work for me, is deciding to open up IRC, and start sending messages to BayleShanks, because he might not even be logged into IRC.

He could be at a friends house. He could be at home, and just not have IRC open. He could have IRC open, but he’s not in the channel. Whatever.

The thing is, the point of our co-presence is on the wiki.

The small SwitchingCost is too high. Even just maintaining the possibility of another space (holding an IRC window open all the time, and maintaining it,) is too high.

It doesn’t matter how much of an AppropriateMedia it is: Getting there is just too costly.

If the initial use of the in-wiki communications channel is simply to negotiate a better channel, that’s fine, and means it’s serving it’s purpose. The purpose is to hook the conversation, to get it started.

But just having an alternative dimension where conversation can exist, doesn’t help us in the dimension where it cannot.

IRC works incredibly well for me. I feel very strongly about this, too: Why invest energy in something that will benefit us ever so slightly, when I can invest my time elsewhere? I’m nearly always on, it’s as easy as dropping a comment about a page in the channel. If there’s interest, there will be a discussion. You think Helmut or other occasional contributors will get involved in a shoutbox? I doubt it. I also don’t believe that occasional contributors who clearly don’t have as much time to contribute to CW would be interested in being under constant observation, ready to be “launched” into a conversation. Maybe they have two or three minutes, skim latest developments, and suddenly they’re being bombarded by messages “Hey, look at this!” – “Hey, let’s talk about my latest edit!” No! no! no! no! That’s not how it works. I’m reading the wiki on my own time, my own tempo, I’ve got a certain groove, and I don’t want to be interrupted. When I want to talk, I’ll check the lounge. So where’s the lounge? A channel is the perfect lounge for me! That’s the place to chill out, watch RecentChanges, and chat. I’ve been looking for you on IRC a few times, so I think it would have worked for me, if more of us had been there. Feel free to write an extension for Oddmuse, or adapt a javascript shoutbox. Personally, I have never used a shoutbox, anywhere. I’ll not oppose work in that direction, but I won’t do anything myself.

  • Will you plug it into CommunityWiki, if I write it?
  • No, I don’t claim the ability to control people with the shoutbox. Yes, I think the OccasionalContributes? may get involved by it.
  • I suspect, though, most of the time, it’ll be Mattis, Bayle, or I talking.
  • Nobody’s bombarding anybody with messages, nor will they be.
  • If Alex’s tempo is to not talk when he’s reading CommunityWiki, then that is Alex’s tempo. It’s definitely not my way of work. So, this sort of decision properly relies in social interaction and negotiation; Not technical limitation.
    • That is: “Oh, Lion’s on! He might be interested in talking right now.” We’ll just know in our heads that, when Alex is visible on the CommunityWiki, more often than not, he prefers not to engage in conversation.
  • A channel is not the perfect lounge for me, because it’s so far out of the way.
  • I’d be very interested in an IRC--wiki bridge, that automatically logged IRC interactions to the CommunityWiki, and made it easy to post from the CW to IRC.

Lion, if you write it, I will plug it in.

OK! :)

And I’ll make an effort to visit #communitywiki, some times.

Perhaps we can pull in KevinReid and BrianTempleton and whoever else is still idling in #onebigsoup, as well.

Links auf diese Seite: http://wiki.crao.net/index.php/T%E9l%E9Pr%E9sence

Diese Seiten lokal erstellen: PagesThatNeedReworking WikiFractality MeatballWiki OccasionalContributor WikiWord WhoIsOnline AppropriateMedia PatrickAnderson SwitchingCost

Sprachen: