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

RE: "The WebID Protocol and Browsers" accepted for presentation

From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 13:01:11 -0700
Message-ID: <SNT143-w351F15F2132B0F841A034692880@phx.gbl>
To: "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>

when you look at the line up,
 
web id says: add a) foaf cards in HTML, with b) decentralized web management culture, with (c) selfsigned certs, with d) URI as name in cert
 
from the topics, others (such as federations, signed json, xmpp, the video vendors) point out similar qualities of their schemes, for the public infrastructure.
 
what distinguishes webid from all the others is mostly its "webbiness". Its going for the TBL paradigm shift.
 
But, what distinguishes the others from webid is that they are not-pure webby (but get  a decent job done, despite using all the things we are not allowed to consider, here).
 
when I remember back, when we did the digital id we were like webid focussed on the public  - the market for enterprise and cross-enterprise (siloed/federated) not really existing. If anything, the internet/web was supposed to be the end of EDI federations/cross-links/bilaratal agreements We were always focussed on the super-webby case that is, not that we paid the slighest attention to W3C - populated at the time by researchers. The early multi-tenant webCAs were merely fancy ordering systems for corporate clients wanting to purchase 50 certs - they were not a multi-tenant CA, or means of running lots of federated/bridge CA domains. So, in many ways,  webid is therefore the continuation of the original vision (except the id now has a URI as name to a semweb/web node rather than DN to a directory node).
 
If I was on a board giving technical advise to a startup (trying to be someone in 18-24 months time), Id be looking to find a way to COOPERATE with the fast burgeoning world of others who ALSO are applying self-signed certs. IN the last 3 days, Ive used 5 major vendor products and SSL, ALL of which used self-signed certs (including client authn). Id would NOT be advising waiting for the world to accept the pure-webby concept, but finding others in the less-than-pure web who are closer to where we would like the web to be. if one gets 30% of what one wants, one is usually doing pretty well! Id be finding away from th webid with an ldap URI to be augmented with an Htpp URI to a foaf card, so the advanced queries and UI that http can do can go beyond what ldap in the office365 sites will be doing (albeit for millions of tenants)
 
When I look at the pitch, and how the conference has been framed, I dont think ANY of the folks in the conference with other visions for the web and its technology baseline are going to stop doing what they are doing, because we exist. I doubt many believe that the webid will be another TBL moment (mostly becuase the crypto-politics doesnt seem right, or fully appreciated).
 
Id be tempted to go, given the topic areas, and given just how many quality people have been drawn. At the same time, it doesnt seem likely to be a conference that will make much difference to this year and next. Its probably too broad in scope to address that goal, and the folks indicating what they are doing for next year are at most only going to tweak things, from conclusions drawn. 
 
 
> From: henry.story@bblfish.net
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:13:37 +0200
> CC: jeff@sayremedia.com
> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
> Subject: "The WebID Protocol and Browsers" accepted for presentation
> 
> So not only has the paper been accepted, but we can present 
> it on Wednesday from 14:00-15:15 in the Protocol and API Proposals 
> track
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/identity-ws/agenda.html
> 
> Henry
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
> 
> 
 		 	   		  
Received on Friday, 13 May 2011 20:01:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 13 May 2011 20:01:41 GMT