- From: <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 18:48:16 +0100
- To: bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org>
- Cc: public-webid@w3.org
On 3 Mar 2014, at 18:16, bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org> wrote: > Am 25.02.2014 17:17, schrieb Andrei Sambra: >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to formally invite everyone to review the current version >> of the specs for WebID [1] and WebID-TLS [2] so that we can have a >> formal call this Friday (Feb 28th), at the usual time [3]. The purpose >> of this call will be to agree on the contents of the new documents so >> that the editors can finally publish them. >> >> Best, >> Andrei >> >> >> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html >> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/tls-respec.html >> [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/wiki/Main_Page#Meetings > > Can we remove the HTTP protocol restriction from the Identity spec? I > think the idea for the separation was to have an abstract/generic > definition of WebID, and a separate spec for initial implementation > (i.e., WebID+TLS). This abstract definition should just reference IRIs > (without scheme), so in the future other specs could be based on our > work. At the same time, people who implement WebID+TLS today with RDF > (and thus HTTP) can be sure they support the whole spec. Hi Bergi, that's not possible. TimBL initially wanted a restrictions on http uris, at the last F2F we voted on this restriction, and then we had 5 months discussion on it + a formal vote. It will be possible to relax this later, but over generalising on a protocol does not help adoption, it just tends to hide complexities. Henry > > bergi > Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Monday, 3 March 2014 17:48:53 UTC