Re: Web Identity and Discovery - WebID 1.0

On 2/6/13 1:05 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> On 6 Feb 2013, at 19:00, Kingsley Idehen <> 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:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter/ handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

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