Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 11/12/11 6:20 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> I see the document is on APPSAWG agenda on the meeting, so I anticipate it
>> will soon become APPSAWG item doc.  I won't be on meeting, but if you
>> discuss the adaptation of Webfinger draft please also take into account I'm
>> in favor of such adaptation (consider this as my 2p).
>
> As the agenda says, some things are not verified... and, in
> particular, this item is likely to be removed.  The chairs might
> mention it in the meeting, but discussion of the document will be on
> the mailing list.
>
> More importantly, your assumption that a document's getting meeting
> time implies that it "will soon become [a working group] doc" is very
> much wrong.  Having it on the meeting agenda simply means that the
> chairs think there will be some benefit to the working group process
> to have a chance to talk about it face to face.  We still would need
> to see enough interest in it, before the working group would accept
> it.
>
> Until now, there's been no interest expressed.  Thanks, Mykyta, for
> weighing in.  Others should also, please, comment here and let the
> working group and the document authors know whether you think this is
> something we (and they -- possibly separate points) should pursue.

<hat type='individual'/>

I think that documentation of the webfinger protocol would be a good 
thing, given that it's somewhat widely used on the web. I do not have a 
strong opinion about whether it is needful for the APPSAWG to take on 
this work.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/