Re: Fwd: Re: a totally minimal RDFa doc, please

> I can create a certificate just fine, but I cannot test it
> successfully on your page. I get in an endless loop, getting asked for
> a certificate.

What page are you referring to?

Re. x509.me, I am saying: when I present an X.509 cert with:

1. Empty SAN -- I have mailto: or acct: scheme URIs in Subject Name, for 
instance
2. Non HTTP scheme based WebID

It indicates problems re. validation. No so when I have an HTTP scheme 
WebID in SAN.

Kingsley
> Here is my WebID in case you wanted to check:
> http://fcns.eu/people/andrei/card#me
>
> Andrei
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Kingsley Idehen<kidehen@openlinksw.com>  wrote:
>>> (I generated the page from the second tab of http://x509.me
>>> The test a certificate option. My cert was generated of the first page
>>> (optional). My cert had a SAN pointing to a blank page to start with. Press
>>> the test button on the second tab. It fails as it was a blank page and spits
>>> out the rdfa required for it to pass. Cut, copy, paste.)
>>>
>> I just tested the service above.
>>
>> Results:
>>
>> 1. HTTP scheme WebIDs - Pass
>> 2. Non HTTP scheme WebIDs - Fail .
>>
>> WebID is not about HTTP scheme WebIDs, solely. Courtesy of WWW ubiquity,
>> HTTP scheme WebIDs are a very cost-effective *option*. Important downside:
>> they are unintuitive. Basically, the problem addressed by WebFinger and
>> Fingerpoint. Thus, we must stick to URI scheme agnosticism re WebID
>> verification.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen
>> President&    CEO
>> OpenLink Software
>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen

Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 16:04:04 UTC