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

Seth Russell russell.seth at gmail.com
Mon Aug 2 22:07:35 CEST 2010


+1 :))   This is a "should" not a "must" or a "can".

Seth Russell
Podcasting: tagtalking.net
Facebook ing: facebook.com/russell.seth
Twitter ing: twitter.com/SethRussell
Blogging: fastblogit.com/seth/
Catalog selling: www.speaktomecatalog.com
Google profile: google.com/profiles/russell.seth


On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Henry Story <henry.story at gmail.com> wrote:

> So we are probably in agreement. I was just arguing against a MUST for an
> HR.
> It is in many cases a good thing to have though. But of course html is not
> human readable either. It just seems that way, becuse the web browser is
> ubitquitous.
>
>
> On 2 Aug 2010, at 21:26, Seth Russell wrote:
>
> > The human readable part of the WebID *is* an *essential* component of the
> > thing.   Without that essential component it is not a real WebID.   We
> > certainly can put in some minimal wording about partial compliance, so
> that
> > if some hacker wants to implement something for a shortcut, that is fine,
> > this specification will not stand in her way, or make her life harder.
> But
> > she should be aware that she is not making a real fully compliant WebID.
> >
> > Seth Russell
> > Podcasting: tagtalking.net
> > Facebook ing: facebook.com/russell.seth
> > Twitter ing: twitter.com/SethRussell
> > Blogging: fastblogit.com/seth/
> > Catalog selling: www.speaktomecatalog.com
> > Google profile: google.com/profiles/russell.seth
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Henry Story <henry.story at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2 Aug 2010, at 21:02, Seth Russell wrote:
> >>
> >>>> The  WebID protocol is about proving Identity, of authentifiying a
> user.
> >>>> That is all.
> >>>
> >>> Who says that
> >>
> >> I do.
> >>
> >>> and why?
> >>
> >> Because it is enough work to do this, and because it does not exclude
> >> another document going into the issues that concern you.
> >>
> >>> Defining the WebID protocol is defining what the
> >>> WebID is.  If it is only for automated agents use, than sorry it is not
> >>> useful to me.
> >>
> >> Who said it was only for automated agents. I said it could be for them,
> so
> >> we should not make their life more difficult in order to force another
> use
> >> case.
> >>
> >> Henry
> >>
> >>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/attachments/20100802/c188d912/attachment.htm 


More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list