[foaf-protocols] catchy logo, catchy name

Story Henry 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"[1] 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.

Henry

> etc.
> 
> mca
> http://amundsen.com/blog/
> 
> [1] 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" [1]
>> 
>> 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?
>> 
>> Henry
>> 
>> [1] http://twitter.com/SethRussell/status/14115845285
>> 
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> foaf-protocols mailing list
>> foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
>> 



More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list