[foaf-protocols] First WebID Teleconference minutes (July 27th 2010)

Seth Russell russell.seth at gmail.com
Mon Aug 2 20:10:29 CEST 2010

On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Henry Story <henry.story at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2 Aug 2010, at 18:45, Nathan wrote:
> >
> > I really like that sentence - perfect even imho.
> >
> > 'MUST have a Machine and Human readable representation of a structured
> > profile document'
> "MUST have a representation of an RDF graph in a machine readable
> representation. See the section on representations for more about this."
> You cannot force a Human readable representation in the spec. That is again
> a pragmatic issue.

Why not?   If you leave this open, then  it is less likely to happen in the
way most of us  want it to happen.   If it doesn't happen, then WebIDs will
be less valuable and less useful.    Pepole and webmasters will have far
less motive to go the extra mile to get them, or agents accept or provide
them.     Then you are certainly would be right, "it will be difficult for
people  to understand what is going on and  takeup will be slow".    Your
also right that this  a pragmatic issue.    Where is it written in stone
that  practical issues cannot be decided by specification?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/attachments/20100802/81f70b8a/attachment.htm 

More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list