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


From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 20:02:10 +0100
Cc: WebID XG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BC3727D5-359A-445C-BB0F-6A0437CF605A@bblfish.net>
To: nathan@webr3.org
Not sure. 

I think WebID spec and testing interoperability of WebID implementations 
is core, as well as issues in browsers that we can see that could improve

ACLs are not far from the core, and may even be needed to get implementations
going a bit beyond the simplest point. They may even be needed for testing.

Every little thing we add can create a huge amount of workload. So we have to
be careful :-) For example standardising ACLs could end up require work comparing
all kinds of ACLs ontologies, not an easy task. 

Perhaps the question to ask is: where does not having ACLs start creating 
interoperability limitations for WebID implementations? Ie, how far can we
go without them?


On 25 Jan 2011, at 19:42, Nathan wrote:

> Hi All,
> Quick scope check, is ACL, like http://esw.w3.org/WebAccessControl under the scope of this IG?
> Best,
> Nathan

Social Web Architect
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2011 19:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:40 UTC