[foaf-protocols] WebID spec: Subject Alternative Name extension
Bruno.Harbulot at manchester.ac.uk
Fri Jul 16 17:01:04 CEST 2010
Sure, all I'm saying is that it's already within the scope of FOAF
As such, I'd treat it as outside the scope of this specification.
When merchants get the WebID Profile document, as they should to get the
information about the user, they'll be able to see if there is a
foaf:mbox with an e-mail address. If there isn't, they'll have to ask
the user as they do now.
On 16/07/10 15:49, Seth Russell wrote:
> Well i'm not requesting that the specification "mandate" the disclosure
> of an email address. I am just requesting that if the customer wants
> to give the merchant their email address, then the specification
> standardize how that is done so the merchant can reliably get it.
> A little background is needed here. We always have the chicken or the
> egg problem to get a protocol flourishing: no merchants will bother to
> implement, if there are no customers out there to use it, and no
> customers will bother to get certificates if there are not places that
> use them. By kicking this one down the road to some geeky foaf
> document will make the chicken and egg paramount. Look there are
> zillions of merchants and web sites out there who just need identity
> and email to be able to function ... to do what they are setup to do.
> You can give all of those web sites a very good reason to implement your
> protocol if you give them the one thing that dearly need, the ability to
> communicate back to their customers.
> Seth Russell
> Alpha testing: tagtalking.net <http://tagtalking.net>
> Facebook ing: facebook.com/russell.seth <http://facebook.com/russell.seth>
> Twitter ing: twitter.com/SethRussell <http://twitter.com/SethRussell>
> Blogging: fastblogit.com/seth/ <http://fastblogit.com/seth/>
> Catalog selling: www.speaktomecatalog.com <http://www.speaktomecatalog.com>
> Google profile: google.com/profiles/russell.seth
More information about the foaf-protocols