Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity

Ok, the paper is ready for xhtml export. Any further changes can then be edited in the xhtml.

Henry


On 25 Apr 2011, at 22:50, Peter Williams wrote:

> Would be cute to have a rdfa  in there, and an wot pgp signature over it (or the xml variant anyways).
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 25, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org> wrote:
> 
>> A side note on the paper, if there's time enough for formatting before the deadline, you could embed RDFa in the formatting.
>> See for instance what we've done for a previous submission
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/09/msnws/papers/trustprivacy.html
>> 
>> Alex.
>> 
>> On 25 Apr 2011, at 09:21, Alexandre Passant wrote:
>> 
>>> References: <1559bb7f8ba15e20e648de2f609bce7e.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com> <1507359E-4F66-49EA-B2A9-429FB9DE763D@bblfish.net> <4DAEE879.8080205@openlinksw.com> <989E50EB-B187-4D59-B047-4343BD358A43@deri.org> <DAC9B75B-77D0-4BBE-96EC-3BFC0A5E9935@bblfish.net> <4DAFF837.3020205@w3.org> <76D25FB9-E9C7-4AF4-8950-306A024CE0C9@bblfish.net> <2FA3E257-2682-45C3-A0E8-7F8326DBEC73@deri.org> <53347F84-2D6A-4FDB-9574-96D3CB47518C@bblfish.net> <EE9E001B-E2BC-4F2A-84C7-842F4A912109@deri.org> <2d1cf5f702b6478c332fcad463629dd8.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com> <9FE8CBE3-9025-494A-B356-5FCB5F791259@deri.org> <22b0972420a04f7ee033d3e92f462788.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com> <84350444-9F91-4903-B799-4E7F72E63D75@bblfish.net> <BANLkTinLLBTaARtae0eeyYJ+OYS+MGn7Rw@m ail.gmail.com> <SNT143-ds19C9ACB7112101459875E992940@phx.gbl> <4DB2FADB.6000409@openlinksw. com> <82caa774c884d2224a2c6c4e39eaa9e9.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com> <3898D462-D699-49B7-AC98-F360EAF5C59E@bblfish.net> <118a7e80c78c484851b3583e576cf508.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com> <9AE6E32B-F6B2-4399-B5A3-E1930ED81116@bblfish.net>
>>> To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
>>> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
>>> Return-Path: alexandre.passant@deri.org
>>> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Apr 2011 07:21:43.0439 (UTC) FILETIME=[6D9419F0:01CC0319]
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I think we should mention in the advantages how easy it is to create a WebID. I added a comment about it on the doc.
>>> Overall, the paper should also mention that WebID is currently worked on in a W3C XG (listing organisations - that also gives more weight to the proposal) and should end with a proposal. E.g. WeID XG are happy to work closely with browser vendors and Webservices developers, providing opensource toolikts (they should be linked somewhere), etc.
>>> 
>>> A reference to the FSW XG would also be appropriate 
>>> 
>>> Alex. 
>>> 
>>> On 24 Apr 2011, at 00:33, Henry Story wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Agree on all below.
>>>> 
>>>> The version I was editing is here, if it makes it easier to see the diffs:
>>>> 
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YMY_UEIuZzZRvPem5cWg1DuC5FqN2DejOBYPX_51q7s/edit?hl=en&authkey=CI7q4cIC
>>>> 
>>>> Henry
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 24 Apr 2011, at 00:29, Jeff Sayre wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 23 Apr 2011, at 19:08, Jeff Sayre wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thus, WebID is not just for the Web.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 23 Apr 2011, at 1:21 PM, Henry Story wrote:
>>>>>>> Agree, but one should pause at the word "just" here. It makes me wonder:
>>>>>>> what else do we have that is bigger? It's a bit like saying Bill Gates
>>>>> is just
>>>>>>> rich....
>>>>> 
>>>>> Removing 'just' from my sentence would not make any sense. The point is
>>>>> that WebID has a practical role beyond the Web (big W). The Internet is
>>>>> bigger than the Web platform. Non-webby protocols can harness the power of
>>>>> WebID.
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Anyway, when talking to browser vendors and builders, one should presume
>>>>>>> that their
>>>>>>> interest lies focused in the space just encompassed by this technology.
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Of course. The workshop is targeting browser vendors. Therefore, the
>>>>> browser-based Internet. As I've said several times before in this thread,
>>>>> our position paper thus needs to be Web (big W) focused.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I assumed Kingsley was making a larger point and not referring
>>>>> specifically to our position paper. That is the downside to threaded email
>>>>> discussions that tend to snake around, periodically going off topic a bit.
>>>>> It can sometimes be hard to know what topic is being discussed. :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> BTW, why have we stopped using Google Docs? I assumed that you were just
>>>>> exporting an HTML version for people's reference and that we would
>>>>> continue our edits in Google Docs. It is impossible for anyone else to
>>>>> make corrections to the document in its present format.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would say that at this stage, with the exception of a few edits and
>>>>> proofreading corrections, we are beginning to nitpick with the paper's
>>>>> details. Remember, *all* this paper needs to do is earn us a presentation
>>>>> invite. It does not need to be perfect in all respects with regards to
>>>>> describing WebID. We can go into more detail, be more precise, or paint a
>>>>> bigger picture in our 20-minute talk.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Social Web Architect
>>>> http://bblfish.net/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/

Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 08:37:31 UTC