On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 3:40 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > So, I think there are basically different eco systems. DID and WebID > etc. In theory, they have similar routes, and in theory can interoperate. > But in reality they are two separate things. > > For example, try adding a did: into a WebID document while complying to > both specs. I dont think you can do it > > So that leaves the question as where things stand with the standards based > approach to the : read-write web / social web / identity / credentials etc. > > Because there's more than just one standards based approach > Yup > IMO the thing people like alot about did: is that it's in JSON. But it > doesnt easily include HTTP URIs which still have a significant network > effect (granted most dont use webid). > JSON w/ URIs has seemed obvious for a decade or more. In a sense it's sad that this field has been encumbered with rdf and it's legacy baggage harking right back to xml for so long, because if it wasn't, we'd arguably be a decade further along and just have (a standardized) JSON w/ URIs for 95%+ of common web / web data needs. > There's definitely value at the intersection of these two diverged > standards. > +1, value is often found at the intersection
Received on Sunday, 25 July 2021 14:51:02 UTC