- From: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:45:36 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com>, www-talk@w3.org
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > /site-meta on http://foobar.com/ doesn't (and can't, on its own) make any > authoritative assertions about mailto:dirk@foobar.com; even though the > authority is the same, the URI scheme is different. That seems like a very strong assertion to make. There's no obvious reason why this is so. DNS, for example, makes many authoritative assertions about all sorts of things without being the same protocol. > I know this particular issue is an important one to the OpenID folks, but > there needs to be a very careful and broad discussion of allowing policy and > metadata from HTTP to be considered *automatically* authoritative for other > protocols. I hadn't thought about it in these terms before, so thanks for the nudge. Whoever controls DNS for a domain also controls how all schemes are handled, in practice. Therefore, it seems to me, it should be possible to declare via DNS that HTTP is authoritative (or not) for a particular scheme. If DNS makes no statement, then I would argue that it is reasonable to use defaults instead, such as falling back to www.foobar.com if foobar.com doesn't work. Cheers, Ben.
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 13:24:47 UTC