W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Web Identity and Discovery - WebID 1.0

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:10:26 -0500
Message-ID: <51129C92.80700@openlinksw.com>
To: public-webid@w3.org
On 2/6/13 1:05 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> On 6 Feb 2013, at 19:00, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>>> In the end it's just a note, with no impact on the definition itself, since I've removed the part about verifiers.
>> That's an inaccurate assumption. If that were true, I wouldn't be writing this mail :-)
> The text currently is this:
> [[
> Hash URIs are encouraged when choosing a WebID since 303 redirects impact performance for clients. All examples in the spec will use such hash URIs.
> ]]
> What is wrong with it?
> Henry

It is totally unnecessary.

Just make examples and demo using hash URIs. Don't open up a can of 
worms and unnecessary inertia by placing implementation optimization in 
a specification.

I would like to assume that the voting produced clarity about this 
thorny issue. Can we not accept the findings from the vote?



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 18:10:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:05:49 UTC