Re: [webfinger] FW: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-08.txt

[Kingsley Idehen <[e-mail]>]

On 12/21/12 5:06 PM, John Bradley wrote:
> Tim is correct.
>
> The URI or IRI is an identifier for a resource.
>
> Where it gets slightly grey is with the acct: scheme.  However I think 
> that the scheme is still identifying an account as the resource, even 
> if there is no default derefrencing.
>
> I think I understand Kingsley wanting to make the transitive link form 
> a identifier for a resource to having that resource denote a abstract 
> object.
>
> However I think that is best left to philosophers and the W3C.
>
> I think the current text is fine.

acct: and http: scheme URIs are both being used to denote something (an 
entity in a discourse realm). These identifiers are also associated with 
resources that bear information about their referents. Using "denote" 
helps clarify what's going on.

You have a Name that resolves to Data. Thereby have two identifiers that 
resolve to the same Data. One route by Name and the other by Location 
(Address). Thus, a URI can dually identify a real world entity while 
also doing the same for a resource that bears data describing said entity.

My suggestion is motivated by a desire to reuse breakthroughs that have 
solved similar problems elsewhere.

Links:

1. http://bit.ly/UXZEYV -- a live demonstration of Web-Scale verifiable 
identity and protected resource access controls (puts these matters into 
practical context)

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen