Re: [foaf-protocols] WebID status recap?

On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:27, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 14 June 2013 19:39, Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com> wrote:
> There is actually nothing untruthful in Henrys quoted statement. And, you can look at it as “not intended to be unkind”. Henry’s predilition for apparently crass statements is well known (but reflects his passion of what he does, not some intent to be nasty). Never having met him or Melvin, I can feel Melvin feels the same. Henry is Henry; and all are welcome.
>  
> Now, here we have an example of semiotic signaling, formed as a result of small-scale, cell-based, human networking. This is the key to metadata-security models (whatever they are).
>  
> Henry (I feel) knows anti-subversion cells are the key to metadata protection; he just doesn't know much about effective counter-surveillance or the design of comsec that supports it. But, I can feel he has a gut feeling (if he can just stay away from those influencing him from UK intel).
>  
> But that can change - so long as its USEFUL to huge number of people living the kinds of lives we live. Like the crypto-revolution in 1993, it HAS TO BE SOCIALLY USEFUL *and* be POLITICALLY CAPABLE of showing itself in that role. it has to be making money, and employing people in service economies, etc.
> 
> I had the pleasure of meeting Henry last year, and I can tell you he has a heart of gold, there's not an ounce of malice in his body.
> 
> If I may say, he doesnt always come across as well as he could do, over email, but I see where he's coming from.  I wont let it get in the way of working, as a team, to make progress :)

I know Melvin you like to bring people together. So here is a simple but difficult mission:

See if we can get the BrowserId folks to use an enhanced cert ontology for their JSON-LD
certificate. Then we can get the BrowserID folks to agree with us on a key ontology published
in a W3C namespace, and get them to move to a signed JSON-LD.

That would align a number of communities on the same easily achievable goal.

  Henry

>  
>  
> Sent from Windows Mail
>  
> From: Nathan
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 10:01 AM
> To: Henry Story
> Cc: foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org, public-webid Group
>  
> Henry Story wrote:
> >> You can add many more auth systems onto this list, as you come up with them. 
> > 
> > It's nice to see Melvin list all these new possibilities. Given that
> > he never implements any of these protocols, and only suggests
> > that others develop and implement them, his enthusiasm is always 
> > the same as on the first days of WebID, and clearly will still be 
> > in 10 years time.
> 
> Henry, I'm surprised at you, Melvin has tirelessly promoted and 
> evangelised WebID for years, most of the people working on it, 
> implementing it, and using it, were introduced to it by Melvin. He 
> understands the web specs, the intersection of the and how they all fit 
> together in the bigger picture.
> 
> What is the point in a specification if nobody is aware of it, what is 
> the point of implementations if nobody uses them? I also seem to 
> remember Melvin working on the very first implementations of the spec 
> and creating some of the first publicly available libraries for it.
> 
> Your words were unkind and uncalled for, he's backed you and webid up 
> for years, as long as I've known him, and since WebIDs inception.
> _______________________________________________
> foaf-protocols mailing list
> foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/