Re: making the webcredits.org spec more strict about 'source' and 'destination' fields.

On 24 April 2012 20:45, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think the subtle point here that most dont get, is that http urls are
>> documents as defined by the protocol.  And anything inside the documents as
>> denoted with a # are data points.  The hard thing in this is web developers
>> having to UNLEARN their previous assumptions.  This single point causes no
>> end of chaos!  The other problem is that the web, like html, is fault
>> tolernt, so that if you get it wrong your system will probably still work!
>> :)
>>
>> The challenge is to getting the language right so that it's easily
>> understood in the short spec doc., in particular so that people can get up
>> and running in under a day.  I'm going to put out a draft in the next few
>> days that is hopefully more understandable.
>>
>
> Section 11.5.1 of Draft 12 of the OpenID 2.0 spec recommends that OPs
> assign a unique url fragment to an OpenID url that changes when the OpenID
> changes ownership.
>
> an appended generation identifier is very different from having the URL
> refer to a big document (say, a roster) and the fragment point to a part of
> it (page and line of someone's listing in the roster.)
>
> The specification for fragments,
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.5 , pretty much says
> "anything goes" and delegates all fragment interpretation to specific
> schemes, so an identity scheme (even an OpenID 2.0 provider that uses
> fragments for more than generation differentiation) seems conformant.
>
> I suggest that example identity strings in the short spec doc don't have
> fragments in them, also that the sentence where you state that any URL will
> do could affirm that when fragments are provided, the fragment is important
> and MUST NOT get stripped.
>
> How about http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966#section-5.1.4 globally
> unique telephone numbers of well-known services for the examples? Is that
> too cute?
>

BTW I believe anyURI is defined here:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-2-20010502/#anyURI

I guess I should add hyperlinks to the spec where reference documents exist
...