public-xg-webid@w3.org from February 2011 by author

'Ryan Sleevi'

• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)

Alexandre Passant

• Re: Proposals for 1st WebID XG Face-To-Face meeting (Friday, 18 February)

Benjamin Heitmann

• Re: On behalf of (Friday, 4 February)
• Re: WebID prehistory (Friday, 4 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-24: Privacy issues from WebID URI dereferencing [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)

Cosimo Streppone

• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: Basic WebID overview (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)

Dan Brickley

• Fwd: [woes] Background on JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-47: WebID and ACLs [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: using foaf/webid at W3C - Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)

Daniel Renfer

• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Saturday, 5 February)

Dirk-Willem van Gulik

• Re: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)

Dominik Tomaszuk

• Re: spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: Proposals for 1st WebID XG Face-To-Face meeting (Friday, 18 February)
• Account Management in Firefox 5 (Tuesday, 8 February)

Evain, Jean-Pierre

• RE: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)

Henry Story

• Re: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• Re: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Saturday, 26 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• Re: slow down and organize (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Wednesday, 23 February)
• spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-48: Fighting spam with WebID [use cases] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• minutes of Monday's teleconf are really up now (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-9 (bblfish): Develop WebID Test Suite [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: using foaf/webid at W3C - Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [keyassure] dane-04 trust anchors (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Linked Data Book (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-44 (revolutionaries): Secure communication among revolutionaries [use cases] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Tuesday, 22 February)
• using foaf/webid at W3C - Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [keyassure] dane-04 trust anchors (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: [keyassure] dane-04 trust anchors (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: step 6 spec, section 3.1 (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: Proposals for 1st WebID XG Face-To-Face meeting (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-9 (bblfish): Develop WebID Test Suite [WebID Spec] (Sunday, 20 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Sunday, 20 February)
• firewalls and TLS and DNSsec was: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-40 (Glossary): A glossary of the preferred terms used for talking about the WebId architecture [WebID Spec] (Friday, 18 February)
• firewalls and TLS and DNSsec was: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Proposals for 1st WebID XG Face-To-Face meeting (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-39: Simplify how public keys are expressed (Thursday, 17 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-39: Simplify how public keys are expressed (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: How transportable are WebIDs ? (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: ACTION-6: Move bugs form old github db to our web bug database (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Agenda for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 21 2011 (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Agenda for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 21 2011 (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (bblfish): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (dnssec): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-31 (webidOnSSH): WebID over SSH? [research] (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: openssh, etc and webid (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-30 (saml): What does WebID need to work with the SAML world? [liaison with other groups] (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (dnssec): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: Homeless WebID spec on w3.org (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• Anonymity in the browser - was: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Saturday, 12 February)
• Re: browser change; little, nothing or a lot? (Saturday, 12 February)
• Re: browser change; little, nothing or a lot? (Saturday, 12 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: Homeless WebID spec on w3.org (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: Account Management in Firefox 5 (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: qualified "reference" FYI (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: Terminology section added to WebID wiki (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Self signed certs (Sunday, 6 February)
• Re: Turning every Web Server into a CA (Friday, 4 February)
• Re: Turning every Web Server into a CA (Friday, 4 February)
• Turning every Web Server into a CA (Thursday, 3 February)
• Agenda for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 7th 2011 (Thursday, 3 February)
• Re: WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• Re: WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 2 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Wednesday, 2 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Peter's wish protocol (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE_22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-21: Temporally Weak URI Ownership [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-23: Authorized Representations and Dereferencing a WebID URI [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-24: Privacy issues from WebID URI dereferencing [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-20: Portable and Hosted Certificates [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-18: Transfer Protocol Independence [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)

Ian Jacobs

• Re: Homeless WebID spec on w3.org (Monday, 14 February)
• Re: Homeless WebID spec on w3.org (Tuesday, 8 February)

Jan Wildeboer

• Re: privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)

jeff@sayremedia.com

• Google's New two-legged AuthN (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Terminology section added to WebID wiki (Monday, 7 February)
• WebID Teleconf, Monday February 7th 2011 (Monday, 7 February)

László Török

• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Apologies for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 7th 2011 (Friday, 4 February)

Manu Sporny

• Fwd: Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)

Martin Gaedke

• RE: Agenda for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 21 2011 (Wednesday, 16 February)
• RE: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)

Melvin Carvalho

• Re: WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: regrets (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Monday, 7 February)
• Re: Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Monday, 7 February)
• Re: Unable to participate in telco today (Monday, 7 February)
• Definition of WebID? (Saturday, 5 February)

Michael Hausenblas

• Proposals for 1st WebID XG Face-To-Face meeting (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Agenda for WebID Teleconf, Monday February 21 2011 (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Monday, 7 February)

Mischa Tuffield

• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)

Nathan

• Re: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• [Fwd: [websec] Fwd: Do Not Track and W3C] (Thursday, 24 February)
• Basic WebID overview (Thursday, 24 February)
• Re: SSL and IRC RE: using foaf/webid at W3C - Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Wednesday, 23 February)
• slow down and organize (Wednesday, 23 February)
• regrets (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Thursday, 17 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-32 (nodns_webid): URIs with IP addresses and security [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Wednesday, 9 February)
• Re: Account Management in Firefox 5 (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• Re: Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Monday, 7 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Self signed certs (Sunday, 6 February)
• Self signed certs (Sunday, 6 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Saturday, 5 February)
• Re: [foaf-protocols] Definition of WebID? (Saturday, 5 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• On behalf of (Friday, 4 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• Re: Fwd: Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Wednesday, 2 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-20: Portable and Hosted Certificates [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)

Paul Hoffman

• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)

Peter Saint-Andre

• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Thursday, 17 February)

Peter Williams

• Re: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• 95% of webid is really easy. just the final 10% of RDF makes it hard (Saturday, 26 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• RE: spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Saturday, 26 February)
• RE: spec: 2 changes, UML sequence and protocol (Saturday, 26 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Saturday, 26 February)
• an ontology for cybersecurity (Friday, 25 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• RE: gnutls SAN URI support RE: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• gnutls SAN URI support RE: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• SSL and IRC RE: using foaf/webid at W3C - Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Wednesday, 23 February)
• RE: slow down and organize (Wednesday, 23 February)
• RE: [woes] Background on JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [keyassure] dane-04 trust anchors (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: step 6 spec, section 3.1 (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: [keyassure] dane-04 trust anchors (Monday, 21 February)
• step 6 spec, section 3.1 (Monday, 21 February)
• RE: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Monday, 21 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Monday, 21 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-9 (bblfish): Develop WebID Test Suite [WebID Spec] (Sunday, 20 February)
• RE: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Sunday, 20 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-44 (revolutionaries): Secure communication among revolutionaries [use cases] (Saturday, 19 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-40 (Glossary): A glossary of the preferred terms used for talking about the WebId architecture [WebID Spec] (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: Web Object Encryption and Signing (WOES) at IETF (Friday, 18 February)
• Re: How transportable are WebIDs ? (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-39: Simplify how public keys are expressed (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-39: Simplify how public keys are expressed (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (bblfish): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-33 (was [foaf-protocols] Webid Spec: Reference to the X.509 RFC 5280?) (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-33: Add a reference to the X.509 spec in the references sections [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-32 (nodns_webid): URIs with IP addresses and security [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (bblfish): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Tuesday, 15 February)
• RE: openssh, etc and webid (Monday, 14 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-5 (dnssec): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Monday, 14 February)
• openssh, etc and webid (Monday, 14 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-29 (prehistory): WebID prehistory [research] (Monday, 14 February)
• RE: cab forum guide; multiple handshakes vs. signed XRD + DANE; Lampson joint authority: cloud providers and webids (Sunday, 13 February)
• cab forum guide; multiple handshakes vs. signed XRD + DANE; Lampson joint authority: cloud providers and webids (Sunday, 13 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: Anonymity in the browser - was: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: browser change; little, nothing or a lot? (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: browser change; little, nothing or a lot? (Saturday, 12 February)
• browser change; little, nothing or a lot? (Saturday, 12 February)
• RE: [foaf-protocols] privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• RE: [foaf-protocols] privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• RE: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Friday, 11 February)
• RE: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Friday, 11 February)
• RE: Google's New two-legged AuthN (Friday, 11 February)
• RE: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• RE: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• RE: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• RE: qualified "reference" FYI (Thursday, 10 February)
• RE: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• RE: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• RE: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• RE: nasty nasty bug in chrome (Wednesday, 9 February)
• RE: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: qualified "reference" FYI (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: Account Management in Firefox 5 (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: Account Management in Firefox 5 (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: qualified "reference" FYI (Tuesday, 8 February)
• qualified "reference" FYI (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)
• RE: Minutes of the 2011-02-07 WebID XG meeting (Monday, 7 February)
• use of IAN for driving the birrel/lampson handoff rule; different semantics to the current IAN "issue" on the books (Monday, 7 February)
• position for telecon (Monday, 7 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: On behalf of (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: Turning every Web Server into a CA (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Friday, 4 February)
• working with the world, as it adapts to changes in the role of DNS (Thursday, 3 February)
• RE: WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• RE: WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• RE: WebID prehistory (Thursday, 3 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-26: [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 2 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Wednesday, 2 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 2 February)
• RE: Peter's wish protocol (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Peter's wish protocol (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Peter's wish protocol (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: WebID-ISSUE-10 (bblfish): Hash URLs for Agents [ontologies] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• RE: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)

Pierre-Antoine Champin

• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• minutes of todays teleconf (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Friday, 4 February)

Pieter.Lange@os3.nl

• Re: WebID-ISSUE-5 (bblfish): Follow Work in publishing keys in DNSSEC (Tuesday, 15 February)

Reto Bachmann-Gmuer

• Re: slow down and organize (Thursday, 24 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Monday, 21 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Monday, 21 February)
• Architecture and Use Cases (Saturday, 19 February)

Reto Bachmann-Gmür

• Re: slow down and organize (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Unable to participate in telco today (Monday, 7 February)

Ryan Sleevi

• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Monday, 28 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)
• RE: issue of initiating client auth for parallel SSL sessionids (Sunday, 27 February)

Seth Russell

• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• How transportable are WebIDs ? (Wednesday, 16 February)

Stephen Kent

• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Wednesday, 23 February)
• Re: [keyassure] publishing the public key (Tuesday, 22 February)

Stéphane Corlosquet

• Re: [foaf-protocols] non issue comments on webid IX draft (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: minutes of todays teleconf (Tuesday, 22 February)
• Re: How transportable are WebIDs ? (Wednesday, 16 February)
• ACTION-3: Look into mercurial and how mercurial and git interact (Wednesday, 16 February)
• ACTION-6: Move bugs form old github db to our web bug database (Wednesday, 16 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-34: Create a security considerations section (was [foaf-protocols] Webid Spec: Security Considerations Section?) (Tuesday, 15 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-33 (was [foaf-protocols] Webid Spec: Reference to the X.509 RFC 5280?) (Tuesday, 15 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Thursday, 10 February)
• Re: Mercurial Repository available (Wednesday, 2 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-24: Privacy issues from WebID URI dereferencing [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)

Toby Inkster

• Re: WebID-ISSUE-24: Privacy issues from WebID URI dereferencing [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: WebID-ISSUE-18: Transfer Protocol Independence [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Documenting implicit assumptions? (Tuesday, 1 February)

Toeroek, Laszlo (EXT)

• RE: WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• RE: German eID (Tuesday, 8 February)

WebID Incubator Group Issue Tracker

• WebID-ISSUE-50: WebID deployments (Monday, 28 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-49: Keep a list of implementations of WebId up to date [implementations] (Saturday, 26 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-48: Fighting spam with WebID [use cases] (Wednesday, 23 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-47: WebID and ACLs [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-46: Signing the profile document [research] (Tuesday, 22 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-45 (pgp-comparison): Compare WebId with PGP/GnuPG Web of Trust [research] (Monday, 21 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-44 (revolutionaries): Secure communication among revolutionaries [use cases] (Saturday, 19 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-43 (email): Replace email verification with WebId [use cases] (Saturday, 19 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-42 (architecture): Describe the abstract WebId architecture (Saturday, 19 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-41 (uses-cases): Identify Use Cases for WebId (Saturday, 19 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-40 (Glossary): A glossary of the preferred terms used for talking about the WebId architecture [WebID Spec] (Friday, 18 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-39: Simplify how public keys are expressed (Wednesday, 16 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-38: Differentiate between the identifying agent and the user operating the identifying agent [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-36: Change reference to RFC2818 to the html version [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 16 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-35: HTTP Status Codes [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-34: Create a security considerations section [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-33: Add a reference to the X.509 spec in the references sections [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-32 (nodns_webid): URIs with IP addresses and security [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 15 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-31 (webidOnSSH): WebID over SSH? [research] (Monday, 14 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-30 (saml): What does WebID need to work with the SAML world? [liaison with other groups] (Monday, 14 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-29 (prehistory): WebID prehistory [research] (Monday, 14 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-27 (bblfish): track electronic IDentity (eID) initivatives [liaison with other groups] (Tuesday, 8 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-26: [WebID Spec] (Wednesday, 2 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-25 (bblfish): List of semweb related papers [research] (Wednesday, 2 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-24: Privacy issues from WebID URI dereferencing [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-23: Authorized Representations and Dereferencing a WebID URI [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-22: Key Pair Revocation / WebID reset [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-21: Temporally Weak URI Ownership [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-20: Portable and Hosted Certificates [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-19: x509v3 Independence and TLS Extensions [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)
• WebID-ISSUE-18: Transfer Protocol Independence [WebID Spec] (Tuesday, 1 February)

Yngve N. Pettersen (Developer Opera Software ASA)

• Re: WebID-ISSUE-28 (bblfish): How does the WebID protocol (foaf+ssl) interact with TLS proxies [User Interface/Browsers] (Saturday, 12 February)

远洋

• Re: [foaf-protocols] privacy considerations: can a nosy https: site probe user identity without explicit permission? (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: Question: User Story -- Bootstrapping Facebook (Friday, 11 February)
• Re: On behalf of (Friday, 4 February)

Last message date: Monday, 28 February 2011 18:33:36 UTC