- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 05:55:00 -0800
- To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-socialweb@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CABP7RbdXUP8KOp7c0k12sy_su=7DV0Nwymf8piP7tV=1wZNXvA@mail.gmail.com>
If we decide to use WebFinger here, then so be it. I personally feel it's easily possible to do significantly better. On Jan 30, 2015 4:15 AM, "☮ elf Pavlik ☮" <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote: > On 01/28/2015 09:54 PM, James M Snell wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > >> I kind of like the trick of having the identifier for the account (aka > >> persona) also be the URL for the profile. I'd also make that the root > URL > >> for the user's webspace. EG http://tantek.com/ or > >> http://sandhawke.livejournal.com/ > >> > >> I know some people don't like that, though, so maybe we can't collapse > the > >> three. Still, it's painful to have the identifier for the > account/persona > >> not be either of those two URLs. If it's not one of those, what is > it, > >> and how can we make sure people understand it and use it correctly? > >> > > > > I agree that it would be ideal to collapse these but I don't believe > > we can get away with it entirely. For instance, within IBM we have a > > corporate "Intranet ID" which is essentially our work email addresses. > > We use these ID's to log in to various services internally, including > > our internal deployment of our Connections product. We have a couple > > of different systems that provide a Profile that describes an > > individual. The Connections Profile is distinct from our Corporate > > Employee Directory profile although there is a trend towards combining > > the two. In this case, the two profiles have distinct URL identifiers > > separate from our "Intranet ID" identifier. > > > > Using the rough sketch model I describe above, an instance of this > > would look like: > > > > <mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com> a :Identity, :Persona ; > > describedBy <http://directory.example.org/?id=jasnell@us.ibm.com>, > > <http://connections.example.org/profiles?id=abc123> . > > > > <http://directory.example.org/?id=jasnell@us.ibm.com> a :Profile ; > > describes <mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com> . > > > > <http://connections.example.org/profiles?id=abc123> a :Profile ; > > describes <mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com> . > > > > Now again, this is just a rough sketch model to help frame the > > conversation. I'm not arguing that this is how we have to model the > > API... only that these are the conceptual elements we need to be > > thinking about. > I understand that you don't use webfinger and acct: scheme? > > We discussed depending on webfinger recently: > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2014Nov/0201.html > > >
Received on Friday, 30 January 2015 13:55:27 UTC