- From: Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 22:22:43 +0000
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 9 Jan 2012, at 22:15, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 1/9/12 4:58 PM, Henry Story wrote: >> On 9 Jan 2012, at 22:49, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> >>> On 1/9/12 4:44 PM, Henry Story wrote: >>>> yes I see. So, you are saying you are a document. Why do you want to do that? >>> He is saying, a document at an address holds my description! >> Ah and what if that document contains the description of 10 people? > > But why would it? How does that question not apply to a # style of HTTP URI? Because the behaviour is extremely well-defined with a #-style URI? That's (partly) why they exist… > A # URI carries implicit de-reference and Name/Address disambiguation. Most miss it completely. WebID cannot be about a style of URI. It should just be about URIs. WebID itself doesn't care. A verifier looks for the subject in the resource it gets back by dereferencing that URI. It matters _not one bit_ to the relying party whether it’s a #-URI or not. The fact is, however, that the vast majority of people don’t NEED to care if they're following recipes and patterns (and it's been emphasised at length that people will be…) M. -- Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space, 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E, Project Office: Room 7083, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ
Received on Monday, 9 January 2012 22:23:09 UTC