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

Re: WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec]

From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:08:15 -0800
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP127947554318DA25B5B451292D20@phx.gbl>
CC: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
It's vague. It confuses three pertinent issue:

The acct uri scheme. Can such a uri go in the San uri field?

The resolution of acct to a signed xrd. Does the xrd provide a meaning for the acct uri?

How acct and the signed xrd relate to the foaf agent named using a http uri and supplying foaf cards. 




On Feb 16, 2011, at 6:19 AM, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
> Date: October 04, 2010
> 
> no. primer or supporting doc at best
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:13 AM, WebID Incubator Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/37
> 
> Raised by: Stéphane Corlosquet
> On product: WebID Spec
> 
> Issue raised by Manu Sporny at https://github.com/webid-community/webid-spec/issues#issue/10
> 
> WebFinger provides a very handy way of identifying a WebID given an e-mail address. Should we support WebFinger-based discovery of an OpenID-supporting WebID endpoint?
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 16:09:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:22 UTC