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

Re: HTTP Signatures draft published at IETF

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:12:00 +1000
Cc: public-webpayments <public-webpayments@w3.org>, Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Message-Id: <BECEC6B1-72DE-45B8-A9E0-17C7E5987A1F@mnot.net>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
They're not invalid, but establishing the context of the link is a bit tricky (since the payload of a request is usually anonymous; i.e., it doesn't have a URI).

Whether that matters or not depends on what you're doing.

Cheers,


On 27 Jul 2014, at 6:27 am, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:

> On 5/9/13 8:05 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> From's semantics and syntax are well-defined, and they are in use. If you want to do this, I'd suggest defining a new header, or a new link relation (to use in Link); From isn't going to fly.
>> 
>> Regards,
> 
> All,
> 
> Coming back to the issue above, is the use of "Link:" in HTTP requests valid? I ask because, It could resolve this issue in a way that prevents custom header bloat.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Kingsley
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/05/2013, at 7:18 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Excerpts from Kingsley Idehen's message of 2013-05-08 20:29:19 +0000:
>>>> On 5/7/13 2:12 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>>> On 7 May 2013 19:01, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com
>>>>> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>    On 05/07/2013 04:04 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah, I'll ping Julian Reschke or Mark Nottingham about it to see if
>>>>>> we can update the HTTP header field easily.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There have been proponents of this for many years e.g. Toby, Nathan,
>>>>>> Kingsley, myself ... just need to get the spec tweaked to
>>>>>> distinguish between strings and URIs.
>>>>>    Do one of you want to take the lead on this? :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sure, I would be happy to.  Kingsley already asked Mark Nottingham
>>>>> about this last month.  Im unsure what the most productive next steps
>>>>> should be.
>>>> Mark,
>>>> 
>>>> Another dimension to the same issue.
>>>> 
>>>> We can loosen the HTTP spec requirements for "From:" without disrupting
>>>> existing products that assume the header value is an Email address.
>>>> 
>>>> All:
>>>> 
>>>> Do we have any data about how broad current use of "From:" actually is?
>>> +1 on allowing URI in "From:" request header :)
>>> 
>>> I set it myself to email for about 2 years now using firefox extension: http://www.garethhunt.com/modifyheaders
>>> 
>>> I also mentioned it in this email with link to work of Blaine Cook on *Privacy-over-Webfinger*
>>> https://groups.google.com/group/webfinger/browse_thread/thread/52599662c273a043
>>> 
>>> warning: mentioned thread got mixed with another thread so few messages went off topic first!
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 28 July 2014 00:12:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:32 UTC