[foaf-protocols] catchy logo, catchy name
henry.story at bblfish.net
Sun May 16 22:29:37 CEST 2010
On 16 May 2010, at 21:15, mike amundsen wrote:
> Something such as "WebId-o-matic" might be a nice way to introduce
> folks to FOAF+SSL.
That is still too geeky. Asking people to copy rdf and install it on their web server
is not going to get us a lot of coverage. Much better would be if http://foafbuilder.qdos.org/ added WebId support. But any Web2.0 app can do it easily: all you need is a home page for every users.
> It would basically create the hosted FOAF _and_ do
> the cert work at the same time.
> Some ways I've described this to others recently are:
> "Certified FOAF",
> "Certified WebId",
> "Personal WebId",
WebId seems good enough. It's like OpenId and has the Webbish elelment. I wonder what Seth thinks.
>  http://www.ldodds.com/foaf/foaf-a-matic
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 15:40, Story Henry <henry.story at bblfish.net> wrote:
>> On Twitter Seth Russel suggested
>> "[foaf+ssl] needs a catchy name and a catchy logo ... it's way too hard to even refer to it ...& needs a generic authorize me button" 
>> Seth, so we have "WebId" as a reasonably catchy name, and the following logo
>> which is kind of cute. foaf+ssl is the technology. But WebId is the name we should be using. Is that good enough?
>>  http://twitter.com/SethRussell/status/14115845285
>> Social Web Architect
>> foaf-protocols mailing list
>> foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
More information about the foaf-protocols