On 2014-08-27 15:49, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 8/27/14 6:47 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >> On 23/08/2014 01:47, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>> The first thing that comes to mind is HSTS - >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Strict_Transport_Security >>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/HTTP_Strict_Transport_Security >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6797 >>> >>> … which basically allows a client to securely discover when they >>> should stop using http:// for a given hostname. >>> >>> IIRC the general feeling on the sort of approach you outline is that >>> the horse has already bolted; we can’t make blanket, retroactive >>> changes to the entire Web. >> >> Rather than retroactive change, could something like this work?: >> >> C: GET http:example.com/example HTTP/x.x >> >> S: xxx ... (2xx or 3xx) >> S: : >> S: Link: https:example.com/example; rel=owl:sameas >> >> (I know the syntax isn't right, but I hope you get the idea.) >> >> #g >> -- > > +1 > > Being explicit about the relations that connect the entities denotes by > HTTP URIs is really the best long term approach. > > Link: https:example.com/example; > rel="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs" . Link: <https:example.com/example>; rel="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs" . ...Received on Thursday, 28 August 2014 05:59:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:38 UTC