IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] Web Finger vs. Simple Web Discovery (SWD)

Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> Thu, 19 April 2012 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 005F921F853D; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.486
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.486 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b1yA+xiokqPH; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7628C21F8621; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo1 with SMTP id fo1so2238508vcb.31 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=2xtqp7dvoLYhw3dFwgXP4LzL5KIkha366QNUmPh33Y4=; b=gc5Ca/sRrMqoeDiC8kbxzeUHNYgzAFAvT4/ZoeY7EyhyL2GdCK7wqQMbtMG/JfF+uy tbxwDUwzDuUFUh4I1zlKqd7KWGJ5SEBqTvsoYfGylIXr/ao6umAEvtuKyS4gXT+5WJpm aZYbbQ2KsqiVFzA4SOF5VlbMdjdv+YPtwjFzsAWIUiNuM1BNBPEgTtDvIbX9qYIhYr7y O0j2hXrPWe4WC1+flfHTYvYvfArh5vRxewTYXVtPPxXX4fPbmtF14tyPmG+MCUi57b62 oD+/87y0anx075OoyOFwIcW/QLwz10CDAM4HqsPoRCE69nMUCJPRdHMG6LUit4tkUKSp b1oA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.153.8 with SMTP id i8mr1487989vcw.73.1334854441552; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.70.98 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366490B2A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <423611CD-8496-4F89-8994-3F837582EB21@gmx.net> <4F8852D0.4020404@cs.tcd.ie> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280EFE8D@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <sjm1unn338j.fsf@mocana.ihtfp.org> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280FACC3@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366490B2A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:54:01 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+7DoitEuk0+6WORJ8Sh0cxm-OLUwr3Rz=iqpv4DUjnog@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
To: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d043be068d0cb6c04be0b04f6"
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG" <oauth@ietf.org>, Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] [apps-discuss] Web Finger vs. Simple Web Discovery (SWD)
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:54:11 -0000

On 19 April 2012 18:48, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> wrote:

> There are two criteria that I would consider to be essential requirements
> for any resulting general-purpose discovery specification:
>
> 1.  Being able to always discover per-user information with a single GET
> (minimizing user interface latency for mobile devices, etc.)
>
> 2.  JSON should be required and it should be the only format required
> (simplicity and ease of deployment/adoption)
>
> SWD already meets those requirements.  If the resulting spec meets those
> requirements, it doesn't matter a lot whether we call it WebFinger or
> Simple Web Discovery, but I believe that the requirements discussion is
> probably the most productive one to be having at this point - not the
> starting point document.
>

+1

                               -- Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:32 AM
> To: oauth@ietf.org WG; Apps Discuss
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [OAUTH-WG] Web Finger vs. Simple Web Discovery
> (SWD)
>
> By all means people should correct me if they think I'm wrong about this,
> but so far from monitoring the discussion there seems to be general support
> for focusing on WebFinger and developing it to meet the needs of those who
> have deployed SWD, versus the opposite.
>
> Does anyone want to argue the opposite?
>
> -MSK, appsawg co-chair
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email