- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 20:56:33 +0200
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, WebID XG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
On 15 July 2011 18:46, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net> wrote: > On 7/15/11 1:47 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> >> Remember, WebID is URI rather than HTTP URI based. It too works fine >> with mailto: scheme URIs. > > Sure, but that doesn't solve the problem we're trying to solve. > > We see web sites asking for email addresses. Even after you do OpenID, they > want an email address. We see users understanding quite well that emails > represent personas. They have their work email, and their home email. > > So, we want to build a protocol where web sites *always* get a valid email > address. Not a URI that could be an email address. Nice work Ben, but... Ok, email seems fine as a lowest common denominator, but that does seem rather to neglect the huge advantage that the Web offers - a HTTP URI can effectively provide any information you like (including email address in, say, a FOAF or XFN profile). So far I've barely glanced at the docs, but I get the impression that the email address will be passed around in a little bundle of JSON. So while using URIs (including mailto:) would strike me as the neatest approach, would it hurt to add another field for a profile URI? Whatever, some kind of convergence/compatibility between BrowserID and WebID seems very desirable. Cheers, Danny. -- http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 22:54:04 UTC