W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > April 2011

Re: self-signed

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:46:56 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTimgy0iwhTOhk5CJurW2wiMW4DDF-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: WebID XG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
[snip]

For the sake of all our inboxes, can this lengthy discussion be turned
into discussion of proposed text for a WebID specification?

For example, who can live with:

"A WebID is a URI (IRI, technically). Although the basic operation of
the protocol is applicable to any URI scheme for which there is some
practical notion of 'de-reference'[1], initial implementors have found
most interoperability through using the common http and https
schemes."

I don't particular care for this text. But I care to see people
arguing productively, and that's more likely when we keep our eyes on
the prize...

I suggest an analogy with HTML's <img> tag; somehow the market settles
on conventions for what to point to, without the spec having to
dictate particular versions of particular allowed formats.

cheers,

Dan

issue: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/55

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#dereference-uri
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 20:47:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:24 UTC