W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Webfinger

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 15:19:33 +0100
Message-ID: <54CCE475.9020707@wwelves.org>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
CC: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
On 01/30/2015 10:39 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> WebFinger maps from URIs to things like email and accounts, not the
>> other way around.
>> A new solution to the "discovery" problem is out of scope I'm pretty
>> sure. However, we can keep references to WebFinger as informative if
>> some folks prefer some other solution. I haven't seen anything deployed
>> in this space besides content negotation, which is again, basically
>> never actually used for well-known reasons regarding its set-up.
> Harry, this isn't helpful. I've written several iterations on social
> API implementations and Discovery has always been a key element. We
> have to be able to discuss it without having someone immediately jump
> up and say it's out of scope. The ability to say, "I have this social
> identifier and I need to find out more about it" is essential.
+1 discovery a key element

> Sando said:
>>> The indieweb reasons against webfinger are mostly not compelling for me, but a few of them are.    If we're going to use it, I'd think we should update it to be JUST a mapping from email to profile URL.  That is, http://w3.org/.well-known/wf2?email= sandro@w3.org would http redirect to http://www.w3.org/People/Sandro.   And that would be the entirely of the standard, give or take edge cases.
> I'd argue against using it (webfinger) and opting for something much
> less complicated. The basic idea of starting with an email like
> identifier is fine, as is doing a GET to some well-known endpoint, but
> the result ought to just be an HTTP redirect back to some fixed point,
> just as you describe here.
>   GET /.well-known/whois?id=jasnell@gmail.com HTTP/1.1
>   HTTP/1.1 302
>   Location: http://jasnell.me
why do you see it as a *major* advantage over receiving JRD document,
even with just a single link in it?

GET /.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *
Content-Type: application/jrd+json

  "subject" : "acct:perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org",
  "links": [
      "rel": "http://webfinger.net/rel/profile-page",
      "href": "https://wwelves.org/perpetual-tripper"

we would just need to clearly recommend a URI to use for "rel"

Received on Saturday, 31 January 2015 14:19:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:26:14 UTC