Re: [webfinger] New WebFinger Draft posted

Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> Sat, 17 August 2013 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
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 BE45A11E823D for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:13 -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 fBVnXl2BDXZt for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C7A521F8AD5 for <webfinger@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id eh20so2349088lab.4 for <webfinger@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:11 -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=40UhDztqDvR9cc3lsYukOUSL5Q+R3iSnGdvk4Xj5f+E=; b=JYJH954ui0GBf6nUZNqZ2XgUBeNhfCKRBx+yxPMxFhW2tdRe+pvSXKEq6wNFSzi1uQ 2KgKvxwUpspeWsErYSt+FpSyY36I2QcQF2Nv6lmiED/+tR1q9dgDd8e7xnHAVBKJj/tj 09B62z9Wg8MUAGaxw+DvzOkIElE5IeoPIAEpVYJyPHDbKj5ZOGdeij+rpqaunr5sTZ7D pu3wwrws1gEc2LvhZBtv1NaujqEEeYLDYgESD3JCsD7aTkTQLoqyDR+oAiqYzTscRqeJ ab73iKx4FW5a15CwUbUKIp4Cf140FkVnmclT1WkAv/yV4cTFkyuhI2FEw0xMsn8eZxya iMVQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.19.70 with SMTP id c6mr3044838lae.25.1376763131385; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.159.233 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Aug 2013 11:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <087c01ce951a$e32da1f0$a988e5d0$@packetizer.com>
References: <087c01ce951a$e32da1f0$a988e5d0$@packetizer.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 20:12:11 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+i38utNp=ML3Qnut2OeoKPRPKhpquUOx5UUqp1Y+Pyiw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1b9c62dd4604e428a548
Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] New WebFinger Draft posted
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 <webfinger.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webfinger>
List-Post: <mailto:webfinger@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 18:12:13 -0000

On 9 August 2013 18:09, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> As we're trying to bring the WebFinger spec to a close, we published a new
> version -17 with some changes the WG might want to consider.
>
> Draft is:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-17
>
> Those changes are:
>
> - Section 2, added a new last paragraph to explain what URI syntax we use
> in
> WebFinger
> - Corrected error in section 3.2 ("Host:" line in example and quotes around
> "3.2")
> - We remove the words "absolute URI" since it's really redundant
> - Added "query target" to 4.5 for clarity
> - Introduced a new section 8 that describes "WebFinger" applications.  This
> is a major new addition.
> - Added a new section 10.3 and 10.4 to address registration of link
> relation
> types and properties.  Link relations types already have a registry and we
> refer to existing procedures.  WebFinger properties did not have a
> registry,
> so we define one, primarily for the purpose of helping people avoid
> creating
> redundant definitions.
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to post to the
> list.
>

[[

   The order of elements in the "links" array indicates an order of
   preference.  Thus, if there are two or more link relations having the
   same "rel" value, the first link relation would indicate the user's
   preferred link.

]]

Maybe remove this altogether, as I am unsure it can be guaranteed.

Case 1: Let's say I have a list of friends, how am I to determine as a
server the preferred friends?  How am I to determine as a client whether
the friends are ordered or not?

Case 2: Say I mash up data from two sources, how do I then order the
combined list?


>
> Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webfinger mailing list
> webfinger@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
>