Re: Webfinger

WebFinger is an IETF standard that seems fairly sensible and has fairly
widespread uptake:

In general,there are no issues with a normative dependency on an IETF
specification and thus my preference is that future W3C Social Web work
"pave the cowpaths" here.

It was not mentioned in charter because it is considered a finished
standard, and a new standard was not necessary.

It is likely not a hard dependency unless we normatively describe
discovery, which we could simply discuss informatively.


On 11/27/2014 04:54 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> Howdy,
> It looks like, MediaGoblin, ActivityPump etc. assume use of
> Webfinger protocol RFC7033[1] (I recall that ActivityPump might not
> require it as hard dependency)
> Currently neither our charter our wiki mentions it. I think we could
> discuss it shortly here and document its current status in our work.
> I think we can expect some push back from IndieWeb community
> Maybe we could also do strawman pool during next meeting just to clarify
> current opinions about making Webfinger a hard dependency?
> Cheers!

Received on Thursday, 27 November 2014 16:45:16 UTC