- From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:08:15 -0800
- To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- CC: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 16:09:29 UTC
It's vague. It confuses three pertinent issue: The acct uri scheme. Can such a uri go in the San uri field? The resolution of acct to a signed xrd. Does the xrd provide a meaning for the acct uri? How acct and the signed xrd relate to the foaf agent named using a http uri and supplying foaf cards. On Feb 16, 2011, at 6:19 AM, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote: > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> > Date: October 04, 2010 > > no. primer or supporting doc at best > > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:13 AM, WebID Incubator Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > > WebID-ISSUE-37: Should WebFinger be mentioned in the spec? [WebID Spec] > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/37 > > Raised by: Stéphane Corlosquet > On product: WebID Spec > > Issue raised by Manu Sporny at https://github.com/webid-community/webid-spec/issues#issue/10 > > WebFinger provides a very handy way of identifying a WebID given an e-mail address. Should we support WebFinger-based discovery of an OpenID-supporting WebID endpoint? > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 16:09:29 UTC