- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:02:47 +0200
- To: shadi@w3.org
- Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 18:56:59 +0200, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:
>> As a new comment, we should only insist on at least one of foaf:mbox
>> or foaf:mbox_sha1
> Adding mbox as required and sha1 as optional (additionally) for now.
> Let's discuss.
Most foaf uses an mbox_sha1 hash instead of putting the email address in
cleartext, as a defence against spammers. Although plenty doesn't. There
are reliable algorithms for comparing these things (they are built into
many foaf tools).
I think requiring a email address is not a brilliant idea, and requiring
one that is in plain scrapeable form is a non-starter.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile chaals@opera.com
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
Here's one we prepared earlier: http://www.opera.com/download
Received on Friday, 10 June 2005 18:02:51 UTC