[foaf-protocols] WebID spec: Subject Alternative Name extension
nathan at webr3.org
Sat Jul 17 00:28:26 CEST 2010
Bruno Harbulot wrote:
> On 16/07/2010 22:46, Seth Russell wrote:
>> Again, the whole point of the WebID is to enable linked data and
>> what it entails. In particular, a simple example is, as you suggest,
>> getting the user's e-mail address. foaf:mbox does just that from the
>> WebID profile document.
>> Putting information in the certificate is rather limited (and
>> anyway, no one asserts that data, since we're not using a PKI).
>> Instead, getting the information from the WebID profile document
>> (aka the FOAF file), you'll be able to populate more things
>> automatically in the merchant sites, not only the e-mail address but
>> perhaps the full name, possibly address, etc.
>> Thing is, if the whole wrap is going to be it's there in the X.509
>> specification, so use it if you want, but what you should do is get the
>> email from a FOAF file, (which err, you probably won't find it there),
>> then, no, we don't get the benefit of instant motivation to
> That is an interesting question indeed.
> We haven't talked about FOAF in the specification, but a lot of the
> interesting data will be using the FOAF vocabulary.
> There are two options:
> (1) We stick to the authentication part in this spec (so we only talk
> about the cert ontology).
> (2) In addition to 1, we build in the dependence on FOAF.
> I'm more in favour of (1).
I'm totally in favour of (1)
> However, mentioning FOAF is indeed important.
sounds more like 'primer' domain or accompanying material to me
fwiw & imho of course :)
More information about the foaf-protocols