Re: Network identity / brand

On 9 July 2012 12:38, Antonio Tapiador del Dujo <atapiador@dit.upm.es>wrote:

> In the case of federated (not distributed), they are two types of
> audiences, sysadmins and users.
>
> IMO, the most appropiate for users is user@host. We are already
> accustomed to it. I had some bad experiences with OpenID's URI schemas.
> They were perceived by users as too complicated.
>
> What about SocialID?
>
> For sysadmins, what about SocialNode? Also pods are ok for me (with
> permission from Diaspora)


I think the most important thing OStatus can do is to update this with a
view to identity, given modern developments:

"Social graph: OStatus does not specify a static representation of the
social graph nor a protocol for retrieving that representation for a user.
We defer to FOAF or XFN where this is required."

There's is a now (finally approved last month) standard here and that's to
use HTML5 data layer and RDFa 1.1.  At that point *any* field in your
profile can legitimately become your identifer.  Whether it be your name,
your local nick, your email address, your GPG key, or any other thing.  It
wont matter, your profile will be the glue that ties it all together.


>
>
> On 09/07/12 08:36, elf Pavlik wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Michiel de Jong's message of 2012-07-09 05:51:05 +0000:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Kingsley Idehen<kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, URI everything and everything is Cool!
>>>>
>>> sure, but would you propose it as a brand? Reading back, we've
>>> mentioned the following "brands" for the identity of fedsocweb as a
>>> network, both as candidates for the phrase "Are you on X?" and for the
>>> phrase "What is your X?":
>>>
>>> fedsocweb
>>> FedSocNet
>>> Web
>>> FSW
>>> FedSocWeb ID
>>>
>> all this FedSocWeb sounds like a weird mouthful ;) I wouldn't get too
>> attached to it
>>
>>  Node
>>>
>> to generic, and node.js squats this term a bit now :(
>>
>>  WebID
>>>
>> sounds great but occupied by quite well specified protocol which at this
>> moment uses HTTP URLs
>>
>>  NetID
>>>
>> hmmm... quite nice and short
>>
>>  user address
>>>
>> i feel alergic to this whole 'user' mania... do you really want to think
>> of YOURSELF as a user?
>>
>>
>>  URI (not sure if this was a serious proposal or just a remark)
>>>
>> I would consider terms like:
>>
>> Online Account
>> Web Account
>> Internet Address
>>
>> or other variation using terms 'Account' and 'Address'
>>
>> with this whole ID i somehow feel bit sceptic, on the other side terms
>> like 'Profile' or 'Persona' sound bit more liberal ;)
>>
>>  and for the identifier string format we have discussed:
>>> user@host
>>>
>> yeah this one sounds like very well established and used from email
>> address
>> i like generic acct: scheme proposal since it makes them a valid URIs
>>
>>
>>  http(s)://host/path/to/user
>>>
>> (s) appreciated :)
>>
>>  either user@host or http(s)://host/path/to/user
>>> =markus, =>markus, !markus, @<nickname>
>>>
>> no offence but =markus feels to me a bit like 'polluting' a global
>> namespace ;)
>>
>>  =markus.com,<markus.com>, %markus.com, *markus.com, markus*com
>>>
>> @markus.tld already might work with xmpp, at some point i have suggested
>> making it a valid webfinger but have heard quite strong objections on WF
>> mailing list
>>
>>  and i would like to add an option (for discussion's sake): firstName
>>> lastName [city [other details]], that's to say, plain text search.
>>>
>> I use name: Pavlik
>> title: elf
>> and fullName: elf Pavlik
>> no first/last Name :)
>>
>> once can reference me in unique way using: perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org(email, xmpp, sip, webfinger) again acct: scheme might come handy here for
>> URIfulness... (maybe one day I cold use it for my WebID as well) besides
>> that I would like to start using digital signatures more and more! oh and I
>> also always try to use this identifier in my VCS commits... plus have my
>> FROM request header in browser set to it as well :p
>>
>> choosing to not accept any nationality sometimes i feel bit frustrated
>> when an online form requires* me to choose some country, i don't believe in
>> countries and even get better and better with not using country names to
>> not propagate this human made fantasy/ideology which i don't agree to
>> participate in.. i believe The Web (+of trust) can support us in moving on
>> from those 'innovations from dark ages'...
>>
>> cities no problem with names but lets keep in mind that some people live
>> more settled lives and some people live more nomadic, at this moment i can
>> say living on European Continent (geographical reference no some EU
>> fantasy) and once we move on from those borders/state IDs i very likely may
>> go more - living on: Planet Earth
>>
>> =)
>> ~ elf Pavlik ~
>>
>
>
>