[foaf-protocols] WebID spec: Subject Alternative Name extension

[Nathan]

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
>> implement.
> 
> 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 :)

Best,