Talk:Data Transfer Project

Add some more info I found out during research

 * , at least so far I am declining your requests below. Why? The sources you give are self-published. What we're looking for in a WP article are encyclopedic facts about the subject of the article that were reported in independent, outside, reliable sources. There are facts that come directly from the organization (if the article is about an organization) that are fine to include in the article, but to me it looks like what you want in the article go beyond that. The question you want to ask is "does someone other than the organization itself think this is a notable fact about the organization?" It is possible that tech reporters or whatnot have reported on the facts you want in the article and if so, those would be good sources for you to suggest. Novellasyes (talk) 17:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for looking into it. I agree that generally this makes a lot of sense. However, I am still somewhat confused, because some technical/sciency articles on Wikipedia do not seem to need external, reliable resources (e.g. Internet_Message_Access_Protocol mostly relies on sources from the same internal IMAP working group). I also had some external sources lying around and marked them in my edit request as "reliable".


 * , okay, got it. I should have read all the references more carefully. This academic paper and this article in The Verge seem sufficiently notable and reliable to base information in the article on them. The academic paper is something you want cited as evidence of DTP's architecture. The Verge article is relevant with respect to mentioning that DTP is used in Google Takeout. Taking those two points separately, for each one, can you indicate what you think a good sentence or summary would look like and also where in the article (what section or what new section) you think should be utilized. Novellasyes (talk) 16:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * , thanks for replying. Nice to see that the information from the Verge article has already been added. I would propose to add it just like I proposed it below: Add an Architecture Section that contains: "The Data Transfer Project uses services’ existing APIs and authorization mechanisms to access data. It then uses service-specific adapters to transfer that data into a common format, and then back into the new service’s API.". Jaudriga (talk) 14:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

++++++++++

Hi. I have been looking at the DTP in the context of an NGI project called DAPSI. I want to contribute some things I found out about DTP to this Wiki page.

Add first demo to Background section:
 * Information to be added: On August 29, 2018 the first offline demo was presented at mydata 2018.
 * Explanation of issue: First prototype is an important milestone
 * References supporting change: Internal -

Add Architecture Section
 * Information to be added: The Data Transfer Project uses services’ existing APIs and authorization mechanisms to access data. It then uses service-specific adapters to transfer that data into a common format, and then back into the new service’s API.
 * Explanation of issue: Give an overview about architecture of the project.
 * References supporting change: Internal - ; Reliable -

Add Goals Section
 * Information to be added:
 * The goals of DTP are :
 * * Enable users to seamlessly and securely transfer their data directly from one provider to another (service-to-service portability)
 * * Encourage organizations to use common data models in their systems
 * * Focus on the portability of end-user data between two participating consumer-oriented providers, at any given time
 * * Reduce the engineering effort for every provider by providing a common project. This way every provider only needs to take care of its own translation from API to generic format, instead of writing a separate implementation for every source and destination.
 * Explanation of issue: List the goals of the project. This is a summary from various statements made in their whitepaper
 * References supporting change: Internal -

Currently used in Google Takout
 * Information to be added: Similarly, DTP is currently being used in Google Takeout.
 * Explanation of issue: Relation to Google Takeout was not clear before
 * References supporting change: Reliable -

Overview about current Implementation Status
 * Information to be added:
 * The project currently supports 10 types of data and 14 service providers.
 * Similarly, DTP is currently being used in Google Takeout   as well as a Microsoft log viewing tool of Office 365. According to the FTC Comment submitted to the FTC  the other two partners, Twitter and Apple, are planning on releasing software based on DTP later this year.
 * Explanation of issue: Current implementation status was not clear before
 * References supporting change: Internal -
 * Similarly, DTP is currently being used in Google Takeout   as well as a Microsoft log viewing tool of Office 365. According to the FTC Comment submitted to the FTC  the other two partners, Twitter and Apple, are planning on releasing software based on DTP later this year.
 * Explanation of issue: Current implementation status was not clear before
 * References supporting change: Internal -

Mention they are looking for partners
 * Information to be added: DTP is still in its early stages. They are actively looking for partners.
 * Explanation of issue: This seems quite important for them. They mention this on a lot of opportunities
 * References supporting change: Internal -

Jaudriga (talk) 08:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC); edited 08:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose I have no connection to the article-subject. I reviewed a sampling of the proposed citations and found many of them were to primary sources, such as government documents, github, commercial whitepapers, the article-subject's own website, etc. Much of the proposed content is promotional or has other problems (e.g. "Enable users to seamlessly and securely transfer their data"). It's possible there is some usable content in the request but not the majority of it. CorporateM (Talk) 21:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Due to the opposition by CorporateM, and the issues they pointed out I am declining this request. The only change I am making is the one that has to do with Google Takeout, since that is the only section that has reliable, secondary sources. Things about the project not covered by secondary sources probably don't need to be in the article. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 20:46, 19 February 2021 (UTC)