- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 21:08:00 +0000
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: public-webid@w3.org
Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 11/29/12 3:42 PM, Henry Story wrote: >> On 29 Nov 2012, at 19:36, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: >> >>> On 11/28/12 3:25 PM, Ted Thibodeau Jr wrote: >>>> But the following, which Henry initially seemed to be >>>> suggesting as better (though his conclusion seems otherwise)? >>>> >>>>>> -http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows#• >>>>>> -http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/mbox#• >>>>>> -http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person#• >>>>>> -http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent#• >>>> These URIs don't look right in Mail.app. >>>> >>>> The URI highlighting stops at the last solidus ("/"), so >>>> they all look like links to the same page -- >>>> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> -- and that is where clicking >>>> them takes me. >>>> >>>> (I am then redirected to the same<http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/> as >>>> above -- but again, if the redirections were handled as >>>> I suggest above, this end result would be very wrong.) >>>> >>>> Be seeing you, >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> A: Yes.http://www.guckes.net/faq/attribution.html >>>> | Q: Are you sure? >>>> | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>>> | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? >>>> >>>> Ted Thibodeau, Jr. // voice +1-781-273-0900 x32 >>>> Senior Support & Evangelism //mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com >>>> //http://twitter.com/TallTed >>>> OpenLink Software, Inc. //http://www.openlinksw.com/ >>>> 10 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 265, Burlington MA 01803 >>>> Weblog --http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/ >>>> LinkedIn --http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/ >>>> Twitter --http://twitter.com/OpenLink >>>> Google+ --http://plus.google.com/100570109519069333827/ >>>> Facebook --http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware >>>> Universal Data Acchess, Integration, and Management Technology >>>> Providers >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> To cut a long story short, I've generated a certificate and produced >>> a screenshot [1] from my keychain instance. I have a hash URI >>> denoting the certificate issuer's alternative name (IAN) and a >>> hashless URI denoting the certificate subject's alternative name >>> (SAN). Clicking on the IAN leads to a 404 since the # was transformed >>> into %23, a decision out of my hands as the end-user i.e., a bug in >>> keychain. >>> >>> As you know, we (historically) have little interest is going around >>> asking vendors to fix bugs in their products, on their on schedules >>> etc.. It's utterly impractical and a complete waste of time. >>> >>> Links: >>> >>> 1. >>> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/WebID/keychain-http-hash-versus-slash-uri-issue-interop-showcase.png >>> -- maybe a link for the relevant section of the for and against Wiki, >>> for future reference. >> I can't remember if I put a bug report to apple for that. It's still >> worth doing it I think. >> >> In any case those types of bugs are not relevant to our hash uri >> issue. So I'll remove that >> from our hash wiki later. >> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/wiki/WebID_Definition/hash > > I am running out of patience with these kinds of comments from you. > > You have an argument you don't like, then feel you have the unilateral > right to remove it from the debate? Why open up a Wiki at all? +1 I'm afraid, if fragments aren't supported everywhere we need them to be, then that's an issue we need to consider - I know it's been mentioned before in other contexts and with other tooling by harry halpin. I believe it would be in everybody's best interests to keep it in there and discuss this thing with eyes wide open. Best, Nathan
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 21:08:33 UTC