- From: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 22:08:32 +0300
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
Hi Kingsley, On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 8:52 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > To conclude, neither http: nor acct: based agent URIs monopolize federated > identity. that's a valid standpoint, and if there are IdP's (identity providers) who prefer to offer http: URLs instead of implementing webfinger, then we can allow both. What we do have to decide IMO is what data format the document found there should have. For webfinger we have XRD and JRD, and for http-based identities i think it's mainly foaf, right? examples: http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/v1.0/xrd-1.0.html#examples http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6415#page-14 http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/DescribingAPerson there's also a microformat to describe a vCard: http://microformats.org/wiki/jcard and an rdf vcard option: http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf/ i think ideally we want to support all common formats, especially at the beginning, to get as much federation as we can, and then later we can deprecate some of them? > We need to stop preoccupying ourselves with implementation details. i agree we should try to look beyond syntactical issues, and just use anything that works, although if we want interoperability then we will have to make sure implementation details of server A are compatible with those of server B, of course. anyway, i think with this i could write up a wiki page about identity. we can then make other wiki pages about how to deal with activity streams, with private messages, and with i don't know, groups, and that way create a bit of a knowledge base describing what people are doing. once we've described, we can analyse, cull, and in the long run, prescribe. is that useful?
Received on Saturday, 7 July 2012 19:08:59 UTC