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

Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:42:41 -0400
Message-ID: <4DAF5351.3000208@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 4/20/11 5:22 PM, peter williams wrote:
> So let's say that a bar meetup happens, after the oral presentaitons.
>
> In the room, there are the folks advocating directories as the source of the
> profiles (because they sell to huge enterprises, run on directories), and
> there are you/us - advocating for the public, essentially. The two worlds
> could not be further apart  - in motivation and culture.
>
> A mediator comes in, and says: look there is one last position open, #5 -
> that which all will do. We  have chatted, and we like the idea of showing
> the user's profile in a browser panel, for the current client cert. We like
> that the browser itself pulls the profile from a "web" source, rather than
> the browser. And, we need two groups to be advocating that pattern, under
> the rules. Neither of you were convincing I your own right, but you
> basically both identified the same pattern.
>
> You two (directory and foaf) are both saying the same thing, differently.
> You meet the 2 endorsers rule, if you act together. One is enterprise
> focused, the other public web focused. But, it's the same pattern.
>
> But, you have to work cooperatively, to meet the rule. Otherwise, we assign
> #5 to the next  contender (add new ciphersuite, suite C from NSA, since they
> have 3 US browser vendors advocating for it...)
>
> Could we imagine allowing the URI to have an ldap URI in the SAN URI SIMPLY
> to address the mediators position?

Why not? The URI is sacrosanct and ldap: is a scheme [1]  :-)

> Or would we stomp off and leave the
> field, unrelenting?

Of course not.
> This kind of the thing is a test of reasoned argument, when selling
> positions (vs theorems).

Yes!

Links:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme

Kingsley
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xg-webid-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-webid-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Henry Story
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:25 PM
> To: jeff@sayremedia.com
> Cc: WebID XG
> Subject: Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity
>
> Ok the latest version of the paper for the W3C Browser workshop has been put
> up here:
>
>    http://bblfish.net/tmp/2011/04/20/
>
> It should be an easy and clear read, and essentially make the point to the
> browser vendors that they need very little effort to make a big difference
> and solve a big problem.
>
> Henry
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 21:43:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 April 2011 21:43:24 GMT