On 14 Oct 2011, at 15:38, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2011 9:15 AM, "Henry Story" <henry.story@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Ok, > > > > It looks like we have enough implementers and other who like cert:key . I'll replace the cert:public_key with it. > > When we have a few implementations we can then remove the "unstable" flags. > > > > Does someone want to take on the task of rewriting the examples in the spec to use cert:key instead of cert:identity ? > > I have a branch on github with the inverse cert:identity, just need to update to the new property name. I guess I could commit it right away to the main repo since we have reached consensus now... > yes good idea. You can also mark it as deprecated. Are you editing the n3 file? that is the one that we base the others on, so we can diff it. Henry > Steph. > > > > > Henry > > > > > > On 14 Oct 2011, at 14:52, Sergio Fernández wrote: > > > >> +1 for me as well to cert:key > >> > >> El 13/10/2011 21:05, "Andrei Sambra" <andrei@fcns.eu> escribió: > >>> > >>> +1 for me as well. Good, elegant solution. > >>> > >>> I can't comment on it too much, but I'm trying to follow this topic. > >>> > >>> Andrei > >>> > >>> Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 13.10.2011 14:41, Henry Story wrote: > >>>> > cert key has my +1 too. > >>>> +1 for key:cert > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dominik 'domel' Tomaszuk > >>>> > > > > Social Web Architect > > http://bblfish.net/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foaf-protocols mailing list > > foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org > > http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols > Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 17:49:52 UTC