On 02/02/2015 11:46 AM, Harry Halpin wrote: > [please keep this cc'ed to Social Interest Group] > > On 02/01/2015 09:59 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote: >> ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: >>> I would prefer not to put limitations of JRD upon our work, and use >>> webfinger *only* as a way to get equivalent http: / https: URI for >>> URIs using other schemes acct: , mailto: , xmpp: etc. >> >> I had a look at the Webfinger specification. >> >> JRD (JSON Resource Descriptor) does not look like something I want to >> use in the future. It is a JSON-formatted XRD document and has its own >> media type (application/jrd+json). And XRD (eXtensible Resource >> Descriptor) is "a simple generic format for describing and discovering >> resources". >> >> Something like Webfinger but based on JSON-LD might be good, but that >> depends on it being in scope here. >> >>> Then stating the actual relations (links/predicates) in JSON-LD >>> document representing particular resource. >> >> +1 > > Note that WebFinger dropped XRD support, included the support for the > non-standard XRI class of identifers. It supports only JRD. However, > there is no reason why you couldn't use JSON-LD with JRD: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=webfinger+json-ld for relevant conversations from webfinger standardization process e.g. * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/3vexx4nYjTa30pIQK_rqpBb2DjQ * https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/1wyqrPqpohpmSm5KfO0OkUjI_po
Received on Monday, 2 February 2015 11:05:33 UTC