Re: Webfinger

On 02/02/2015 03:05 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> I don't understand your objection.
I think JRD may but on us some unnecessary constraints. I'll take a look
at it and will highlight any possible issues I may notice!

> 
> Link relations are a great way to express relationships between
> entities, whether expressed as HTML or JRD. It's even supported as part
> of HTTP headers.
Sure, they may even become soon better aligned with Linked Data
https://github.com/mnot/I-D/issues/39

> 
> -Evan
> 
> On 2015-01-31 10:50 AM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>> On 01/31/2015 04:33 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>> I think it's sufficient to define one or more link relations for Social
>>> API endpoints.
>>>
>>>      outbox
>>>      inbox
>>>      following
>>>      groups
>>>      lists
>>>
>>> That way different discovery mechanisms for different kinds of URI
>>> identifiers (http, Webfinger, etc.) will work fine.
>> -1
>>
>> I would prefer not to put limitations of JRD upon our work, and use
>> webfinger *only* as a way to get equivalent http: / https: URI for URIs
>> using other schemes acct: , mailto: , xmpp: etc.
>>
>> Then stating the actual relations (links/predicates) in JSON-LD document
>> representing particular resource.
>>
> 
>