Re: [webfinger] Registration of a URN for WebFinger Properties

[Melvin Carvalho <[e-mail]>]

On 11 October 2013 21:01, Paul E. Jones <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  On 10/11/2013 2:57 PM, Will Norris wrote:
>
>  FOAF does not define a set of URI.  Rather, it's XML-based markup.
>> WebFinger uses URIs as identifiers.  I don't really care where those
>> identifiers are defined, but at present there is no standard property
>> identifer in URI form that means "name".
>>
>
>  http://schema.org/name ?  Of course that doesn't have the language
> fragment, though as you point out below, there's an argument it may not be
> needed anyway.  /shrug
>
>
>
> Yeah, that would work.  And one cold add a URI fragment to that definition
> easily enough.
>
> These are all too easy to create.  Who will put a stake in the ground and
> declare one property ID is the standard?
>

It would be nice if everyone could settle on one term, but the urge to
reinvent is just too strong for many to resist.  Properties on the web are
bottom-up by nature.  There is no "one" standard, and the web is too big
for there ever to be one, in truth there's some overlap between all
vocabs.

WRT to webfinger, as a common pattern, I'd suggest reusing foaf:name as
it's the longest used relation of this type on the web, there must be
around 10-100 million examples of them out there by now.

"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name"

Of course there's something of a problem in webfinger if you have two names
(eg Bono and Paul Hewson), that's not allowed.


>
> Paul
>
>