Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA2421E8116 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] 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 sVIn7nz6Fgy8 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:53:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0D221E811A for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id x18so2390637lbi.24 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:53:15 -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=cbvZMK3/SaBuofXDQNwcaHBuh8ukJ4Cwib0/Rh1tYng=; b=ej6AviW9m8iEL/sJi+TKt7eVdULb9CIUOTsyMvic8yYPTC+w5F9LknC9lmUwRl0a4x 7CkdA7peLgpQQvbrhTwdEZuV1M/qk00YkG9akrY9ezQy3q1XFpZSC1v9aYI7RD9QrLtY GcD7YBBITudEDnrsgFCNpChnCKiSd9ObX936y7CvEh0+2m9nIrBrVxzCvbinCwjiS/ft YSfMmAcPhjzGscGjyhXCiFgviASa4y0QyDBrBRB6DTm/oeFgFlpyoLAF+w2rlqhJ74GY RjMdEiwxCRazUCBWfSCJ7jQ+efa/MxDinqymgbf5Ot4xqUso8UpZ+IiBr+uXjhuePlkS /NLA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.89.100 with SMTP id bn4mr12993457lbb.16.1381427594972; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:53:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.159.233 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:53:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 19:53:14 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: Will Norris Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c379ec14d61e04e866ad55 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Registration of a URN for WebFinger Properties X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 17:54:04 -0000 --001a11c379ec14d61e04e866ad55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 10 October 2013 19:48, Will Norris wrote: > There irony here is that WebFinger itself was created to solve the problem > of resolving an otherwise unresolvable URI (originally mailto and later > acct URIs). URNs have the same problem, and since they have no > well-defined host, you can't even use WebFinger to resolve them. I know > there have been some efforts to define URN resolution (rfc2483 et al), but > as far as I know none are very well adopted. Using HTTP URIs makes the > most sense to me. > > But do we really need yet another registry of properties, the vast > majority of which I'm sure have been defined in a dozen other places? Is > there a reason why reusing one of these existing namespaces would not work? > (and if something WebFinger specific really is desirable, then we can > continue using webfinger.net, which has already been used for > http://webfinger.net/rel/avatar/ and > http://webfinger.net/rel/profile-page/. That was kind of the idea of > running it as a static site out of the GitHub "webfinger" org; it's very > easy to give others access to everything. That's what we've done with > activitystrea.ms for several years now) > +1 Yes, that's nice but Id suggest it's better to put all the terms in one single file to reduce multiple HTTP GETs and maintenance. Also I forgot to mention VCard which also covers a lot of terms needed. > > > On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > >> Yes, any URI can be used to identify a property. However, there has to be >> some agreed scheme and structure for things defined in the IETF. The point >> of the suggestion was to specify that. >> >> We could use HTTP, but I've never seen that scheme used in IETF documents >> for this type of thing. I've seen URNs, though. >> >> Paul >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Melvin Carvalho >> *Sent:* Sun Oct 06 09:19:42 EDT 2013 >> *To:* "Paul E. Jones" >> *Cc:* webfinger >> *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Registration of a URN for WebFinger Properties >> >> >> >> >> On 5 October 2013 03:22, Paul E. Jones wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> As you know, properties (both link and subject-specific properties) are >>> identified via a URI. For applications that are defined outside the IETF, >>> those organizations are able to define any URI they wish to use. For any >>> we might define within the IETF, however, we need something. >>> >>> In anticipation of having such a need, I think we should create a >>> document along the lines of RFC 6755 for WebFinger. Specifically, we would >>> define a URN sub-namespace as: >>> >>> urn:ietf:params:webfinger >>> >>> One such potentially-useful subject-specific properties are "name", >>> which would be the the subject's name intended for human consumption. If >>> you've queried my WebFinger server, you would know I currently advertise my >>> name in English and Chinese. For the "default" name, the URN might be: >>> >>> urn:ietf:params:webfinger:name >>> >>> For language-specific variants, it might be: >>> >>> urn:ietf:params:webfinger:name:zh-CN >>> >>> Defining the various properties and their meaning is an exercise for >>> another day, but I hope you see the value in defining the URN sub-namespace. >>> >> >> Cant this be done using traditional HTTP keys. The advantage being that >> they can be systematically dereferenced using http GET, rather than having >> to look it up in a central registry in a non machine readable way. This is >> what has been going on for 10+ years, with FOAF, schema.org, open graph >> protocol and others. Have I missed something? >> >> >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webfinger mailing list >>> webfinger@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> > --001a11c379ec14d61e04e866ad55 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 10 October 2013 19:48, Will Norris <will@willnorris.com&g= t; wrote:
There irony here is that We= bFinger itself was created to solve the problem of resolving an otherwise u= nresolvable URI (originally mailto and later acct URIs). =A0URNs have the s= ame problem, and since they have no well-defined host, you can't even u= se WebFinger to resolve them. =A0I know there have been some efforts to def= ine URN resolution (rfc2483 et al), but as far as I know none are very well= adopted. =A0Using HTTP URIs makes the most sense to me.

But do we really need yet another registry of properties, th= e vast majority of which I'm sure have been defined in a dozen other pl= aces? =A0Is there a reason why reusing one of these existing namespaces wou= ld not work? =A0(and if something WebFinger specific really is desirable, t= hen we can continue using webfinger.net, which has already been used for=A0http://webfinger.net/rel/avatar/= and=A0http://webfinger.net/rel/profile-page/. =A0That was kind of the id= ea of running it as a static site out of the GitHub "webfinger" o= rg; it's very easy to give others access to everything. =A0That's w= hat we've done with activitystrea.ms for several years now)

+1

Yes, that's nice but I= d suggest it's better to put all the terms in one single file to reduce= multiple HTTP GETs and maintenance.

Also I forgot to me= ntion VCard which also covers a lot of terms needed.
=A0

On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Paul E. Jo= nes <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Yes, any URI can be used= to identify a property. However, there has to be some agreed scheme and st= ructure for things defined in the IETF. The point of the suggestion was to = specify that.

We could use HTTP, but I've never seen that scheme used = in IETF documents for this type of thing. I've seen URNs, though.

Paul



From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Sun Oct 06 09:19:42 EDT 2013
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Registration of a URN for WebFinger Propert= ies




On 5 October 2013 03:22, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com<= /a>> wrote:
Folks,
=A0
As you know, properties (both link and subject-specific properties) ar= e identified via a URI.=A0 For applications that are defined outside the IE= TF, those organizations are able to define any URI they wish to use.=A0 For= any we might define within the IETF, however, we need something.
=A0
In anticipation of having such a need, I think we should create a docu= ment along the lines of RFC 6755 for WebFinger.=A0 Specifically, we would d= efine a URN sub-namespace as:
=A0
=A0=A0 urn:ietf:params:webfinger
=A0
One such potentially-useful subject-specific properties are "name= ", which would be the the subject's name intended for human consum= ption.=A0 If you've queried my WebFinger server, you would know I curre= ntly advertise my name in English and Chinese.=A0 For the "default&quo= t; name, the URN might be:
=A0
=A0=A0 urn:ietf:params:webfinger:name
=A0
For language-specific variants, it might be:
=A0
=A0=A0 urn:ietf:params:webfinger:name:zh-CN
=A0
Defining the various properties and their meaning is an exercise for a= nother day, but I hope you see the value in defining the URN sub-namespace.=

=A0
=A0
Thoughts?
=A0
Paul
=A0

__________________= _____________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger



_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger



--001a11c379ec14d61e04e866ad55--