[foaf-protocols] what if

[Reto Bachmann-Gmür]

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Nathan <nathan at webr3.org> wrote:
> Reto Bachmann-Gmür wrote:
>>
>> the public key is an attribute of an resource
>
> yes, not the representation
yes, a resource of type foaf:Agent
>
>> described by the document in the entity body, this resource is usually the
>> primary
>> topic of the requested resource.
>
> again, resource, not representation
(do you see a contradiction here to what I'm saying?)
afaik http headers can relate both to the resource (in the form of
response headers) as well as to the representation (in the form of
entity headers) so that isn't reason enough to dismiss your proposal.

...
> who even needs an rdf property in an http header, that's something that has
> been added in to what we know as FOAF+SSL. We can easily achieve what we
> want with a header like:
>
>  WebIDOwnerKey: FDB6FB1159710EAEEC69BEE94DF....
probably we could add the "WebIDOwnerKey" also to the ip packets and
to maybe even to ethernet frames, so consumers no longer have to care
about those higher abstractions.

Reto