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

Re: WebID in Browsers conf feedback

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:16:48 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xKbpp=+UgBV_2TbnOxN4wTEqeeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Cc: "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
On 12 June 2011 20:06, Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com> wrote:
> I think there is an entire topic missing - if one is  to respond to the 2
> objections presented (vs hide them under the carpet).
>
> Its the topic of qualifying the authority component of the webid
> claim, persuant to deciding to follow the ref (or not). It concerns
> leveraging the authority resolver built into the web - DNS resolvers. It
> concerns how DNS resolvers are then organized - whether one is using a
> public resolver, or a private-walled-garden resolver that has a "non-public"
> zone replication/trust model and/or zone key signing/distribution.
>
> But, I'm not convinced anyone has accepted the premise of the objection we
> are hearing - that refs have to first qualified, before being re-deferenced.
>
> Im half expecting to hear folks argue: oh the web as a giant dynamic system
> will crowdsource whats viable and sustaintable, and the faff and
> disrpeputable stuff will eventually converge to zero (if one waits long
> enough). And, to be webby, THIS is the premise we MUST accept (rather than
> fiddle with DNS authority models, say).

Well no, I'd simply suggest that DNS is out of scope. WebID works on a
different layer.

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 
http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Sunday, 12 June 2011 21:17:26 UTC

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