3 ms·

I agree, most SaaS concepts are similar and have large overlaps in feature and functionality. Just for Social Media, we've written a common data structure forma

I agree, most SaaS concepts are similar and have large overlaps in feature and functionality. Just for Social Media, we've written a common data structure format (lbsn.vgiscience.org) where it is possible to import/export from all services (this one is specifically tailored for visual analytics and exploration of research/privacy questions). When working on the structure, it became clear that most Social Media concepts exist in a similar form on multiple sites. There is very little functionality that is unique to a single SaaS.

capableweb 5y ago
Indeed, common data structures across platforms feels more common than specialized ones, biggest difference seems to mostly sit in the UI/UX layer at this point. Data Transfer project is also trying to define some common data models that companies can use to ensure they export/import agreed data models, although it's still not very extensive: https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/tree/master/portability-types-transfer/src/main/java/org/datatransferproject/types/transfer/models https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/tree/master/...
- Helmut10001 5y ago
  Yes, we had a look at the data transfer project, but it really felt more like an alibi. Looking at it now, I do not see much improvement. I don't think you can force companies to offer data exchange interfaces, if they have no benefit from it.
  - capableweb 5y ago
    > Looking at it now, I do not see much improvement Same here, very disappointing. > I don't think you can force companies to offer data exchange interfaces, if they have no benefit from it. Me neither, and neither does the people who came up with GDPR. That's why the "Data Portability" directive doesn't dictate exactly what format/model your exported data has to be in. It simply has to be exportable in a machine-readable format. The reason that it's just about exporting and not transferring, is because companies still are on the fence to allow users to move to different companies with their data. This directive does force those companies to finally behave in the favor of their users, instead of shareholders.

capableweb 5y ago

Indeed, common data structures across platforms feels more common than specialized ones, biggest difference seems to mostly sit in the UI/UX layer at this point. Data Transfer project is also trying to define some common data models that companies can use to ensure they export/import agreed data models, although it's still not very extensive: https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/tree/master/portability-types-transfer/src/main/java/org/datatransferproject/types/transfer/models https://github.com/google/data-transfer-project/tree/master/...

Helmut10001 5y ago
Yes, we had a look at the data transfer project, but it really felt more like an alibi. Looking at it now, I do not see much improvement. I don't think you can force companies to offer data exchange interfaces, if they have no benefit from it.
- capableweb 5y ago
  > Looking at it now, I do not see much improvement Same here, very disappointing. > I don't think you can force companies to offer data exchange interfaces, if they have no benefit from it. Me neither, and neither does the people who came up with GDPR. That's why the "Data Portability" directive doesn't dictate exactly what format/model your exported data has to be in. It simply has to be exportable in a machine-readable format. The reason that it's just about exporting and not transferring, is because companies still are on the fence to allow users to move to different companies with their data. This directive does force those companies to finally behave in the favor of their users, instead of shareholders.