[foaf-protocols] WebID talk at W3C

Manu Sporny msporny at digitalbazaar.com
Wed Aug 25 07:05:49 CEST 2010


On 08/24/2010 12:41 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> I have one little issue. The demo, your platform demo,  isn't one I 
> would call representative of WebID's essence.
> 
> Sorry, but I still don't get the elevation of Manu's solution to 
> definitive demo status re. WebID.
> 
> Manu: no offense intended here, but this simply doesn't feel right at
> all.

No offense taken. However, I should point out that it is our demo that
was the basis for this meeting with the W3C this coming Thursday. One of
the things they were expecting to see was a demo of WebID - and that was
supposed to be a small part of an overall demonstration on Identity on
the Web.

I've also been talking with Henry and he said that he'd have a more
representativve WebID demo as a 2-3 minute video ready by the time that
we present. I've already said that we'd integrate that into the slide deck.

Re: the Js+Flash WebID demo, we have tried to be true to the WebID spec
as it stands right now. Specifically, this section:

http://payswarm.com/webid/#authentication-sequence

We do steps #1-#4 right now. #5 and #6 is something we're working on,
but has been proven already via other implementations... it's just a
matter of hooking up an RDF/XML parser or XHTML+RDFa parser and doing a
query on the resulting graph.

I think much of the misunderstandings of what the demo does and does not
do can be chalked up to not having the proper documentation in place to
explain exactly what is happening with the Javascript + Flash WebID demo
and what our development timeline looks like.

It seems to me that both Henry, Kinsgley and Joe are saying that even if
we implement steps #1-#6, and we allow export of WebID to the browser
keychain that we still wouldn't be "representative of WebID's essence".

I'm having a hard time understanding what we are missing as both Henry
and Kingsley are listing different things at different levels of importance.

> Joe Presbrey wrote:
> Agreed. I think it would be a sad waste of WebID's 15 minutes to
> mention Javascript or Flash.

We never intended to focus on that part since it's an implementation
detail. It doesn't matter in the long run since we want this stuff to be
in browsers. However, we have to have a good answer to the "What if
browser vendors don't see things in the way that the WebID community
sees things?". How do we get from login/identity on the Web today to the
promised land of WebID 3 years from now?

> A WebID demo should simply be a URI that enables login/signup using 
> WebIDs generated by any WebID protocol compliant platform.  A more 
> neutral demonstration of WebID prowess resides at: 
> https://ophelia.g5n.co.uk:10443/cheese/

Henry has reassured me that he will have a demo like this, ready to
present to W3C by Thursday. So we have both approaches covered.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: WebID - Universal Login for the Web
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/08/07/webid/2/


More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list