Re: [webfinger] New WebFinger Draft posted

On 17 August 2013 20:32, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

> Melvin,
>
> We have been asked about this before. If we leave it in, it meets the
> needs of some. I admit there might be cases where it's hard to control
> order, but if it matters, there is at least a way.
>
> In my own implementation, I assign an integer value to each entry and sort
> on that.
>
> I have no strong objection either way, but I do think it's good to have
> for those who care.
>

I understand the trade offs.  However, I can see that this is useful in
many cases, particularly this would work well for openid, but other use
cases, eg to have a friends list, for something like a federated social
web, would then be perhaps impractical with JRD (not the end of the world,
though)

> Paul
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Sat Aug 17 14:12:11 EDT 2013
> *To:* "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
> *Cc:* webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] New WebFinger Draft posted
>
>
>
>
> 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
>>
>
>