W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > December 2014

Re: Zero Click Bitcoin Micropayments using HTTP 402

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 14:13:24 -0500
Message-ID: <54A44AD4.7070508@openlinksw.com>
To: public-webpayments@w3.org
On 12/31/14 12:45 PM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> On 2014-12-31 18:37, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 12/31/14 9:39 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>>> So even if one could do the same thing with HTTP 402 the question
>>> remains: Why would
>>> this be better unless 402 got a built-in payment hook[*] in the 
>>> browser?
>>
>> The problem here is that you are not connecting critical dots re.
>
> No, the problem is that there is no specification.
>
> Anders

You are conflating specification, infrastructure, and solutions (built 
using infrastructure e.g., communications protocol and logic).

And by the way, isn't this group all about trying to work towards some 
kind of specification? You are now even complaining about the non 
existence of the quest?


Kingsley
>
>
>  what
>> HTTP enables, ditto what the RDF language (system of signs, syntax, and
>> semantics) formalizes, retrospectively:
>>
>> 1. HTTP is a data exchange protocol
>> 2. You can use logic to deductively perform all sorts of operations over
>> HTTP
>> 3. HTTP also includes the ability to create subject, predicate, object
>> statements (via Link: notation in request and response headers) .
>>
>> 1-3 enabled communications to be driven by logic via the semantics of
>> "Link:" based relations (what RDF subject, predicate, object statements
>> represent).
>>
>> This might help:
>>
>> RDF is a formalization of what already existed in AWWW. By that I mean
>> <link/> (in HTML) and "Link:"  (in HTTP) notations for relation
>> representation have always been part of overall Web narrative. RDF
>> is/was an attempt to formalize this aspect of the Web such that
>> relations could also be represented using additional notations: RDF/XML
>> (initial addition, which caused nothing but confusion due to really poor
>> narratives etc..), TURTLE (which sanitized matters and enabled LOD
>> bootstrap), JSON-LD (which is sanitizing matters for Web Developers that
>> work with JSON) etc..
>>
>> This is why I sent you links about Language and Logic [1] so that you
>> can see where we are coming from in regards to Logic and Trust related
>> matters. BTW -- WebID-TLS is just one example of using logic to
>> determine Trust via a TLS session where data for inference is accessed
>> from a WebID-Profile document.  As long as we stick with 1-3 above, we
>> can use logic to construct a variety of smart Trust Models that are
>> never pegged to a specific notation, document type, programming
>> language, or operating environment.
>>
>> Link:
>>
>> [1] http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/rolelog.pdf
>>
>
>
>


-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this



Received on Wednesday, 31 December 2014 19:13:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:37 UTC