Regarding focus of draft-nottingham-for-the-users

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

(I note that the disucssion is largely not on the venue, but the content 
of the draft.)

IN looking at the draft, and looking at the discussion of the draft, 
there is one aspect that strikes me as confusing that I have not seen 
mentioned.

I can not argue that the end human beings who make use of the Internet 
are very important to the question of "what are we trying to 
accomplish?" and "what does it mean to make the Internet better?".

However, I have been hearing for years about machine-to-machine 
communication.  And its growing importance.  The current incarnation is 
IoT, but that is just one aspect.  There are lots of other ways that 
machines interact over the Internet.  The Internet is "for" those 
interactions as well.

One could argue that those interactions are eventually for the benefit 
of some human (or humans).  But even if one wants to take that tack, I 
have trouble viewing those important people as "users" of the Internet 
for these interactions.

So I think we need to be a bit careful to keep track of the difference 
between "the Internet is for human beings" and "the Internet is only for 
human beings".  The later seems to be the thrust of the current langauge 
in the document.

Yours,
Joel