W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity

From: Jeff Sayre <jeff@sayremedia.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:15:01 -0700
Message-ID: <22b0972420a04f7ee033d3e92f462788.squirrel@webmail.sayremedia.com>
To: "Alexandre Passant" <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
Cc: "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "WebID XG" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
> Hi Jeff, all,
> Agreed with all your statements, but in that case, imo, there should be
> more focus on the USP of WebID, and less on the technical side.
> *What* can WebID offer, and *why* that's needed, rather than *how* (i.e.
> expanding the section 2, and maybe shortening 3)
> m2c
> Alex.

Alex -

That is an interesting point. We do need to strike a balance between
technical presentation and user-focused benefits. I'm not too sure how
that is best achieved in our position paper, but I thought that we had
done a decent job.

Remember, our primary audience is browser vendors. I do realize that there
will be more than just browser vendors in attendance, but it is the
browser vendors we need to hook with the virtues of WebID. We need them to
push critical changes to their browser code, changes that will enable
WebID to become a viable protocol for mass adoption.

Thus, it seemed the technical overview was key to piquing their interest.
Perhaps that is not an accurate assumption. Again, we can and will cover
more than technical details in our presentation. So, it really boils down
to whether the position paper does a sufficient job of getting their

What do others think?

Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 18:15:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:44 UTC