W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fedsocweb@w3.org > November 2012

Re: WebFinger compromises

From: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:34:51 -0700
Cc: <public-fedsocweb@w3.org>, <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <F7642135-C776-4622-A1C3-E87F64523041@gmail.com>
To: webfinger@googlegroups.com

On Oct 31, 2012, at 9:16 PM, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

> Brad,
>  
> Comments in green: 

that is fairly random!

> PEJ: Yeah, so how do we get to that thing we can build on?  Current requirements … bare bone … are:
> ·         Servers must support JSON, may support XRD (or TLV or whatever)

Only one.

> ·         Servers must make /.well-known/host-meta and /.well-known/host-meta.json resources accessible

Only one.

> ·         Servers must support the “resource” parameter

Discuss.

> This means the vanilla client on the Internet will query only for JSON.  Client developers have mostly said they want the simplest possible solution, which means most will send requests with the “resource” parameter. 

As a resource developer, I want a simple solution as well.

> More than one has expressed a desire to be able to cache /.well-known/host-meta to speed processing of resource-specific queries.

Early optimization in my opinion.

>  
> Personally, I think we have the solution in hand. If I change one thing, there is somebody who will not be happy. 

Trying to please everyone leads to a mediocre standard. Have we not learned anything from Apple? Not having a keypad on a phone was going to make some people unhappy. Worked out well at the end of the day.

> As compromises go, I think we’ve done pretty well.  I say that, because I know one can build both a client and server implementation quite easily and only one format they need to consider.

Not true. The server needs to know both.

-- Dick
Received on Thursday, 1 November 2012 05:35:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 November 2012 05:35:32 GMT