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

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.

John B.
On 2012-12-21, at 6:38 PM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

> No. The I in URI stands for Identifier. URIs identify resources, that’s what they’re for. -T
> 
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> 
> Could this:
> 
>  WebFinger is used to discover information about people or other
>    entities on the Internet that are identified by a URI [6] or IRI [7]
>    using standard Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [2] methods over a
>    secure transport [14].
> 
> become:
> 
>  WebFinger is used to discover information about people or other
>    entities on the Internet that are *denoted* by a URI [6] or IRI [7]. Actual information retrieval uses
>    standard Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) [2] methods over a
>    secure transport [14].
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> webfinger mailing list
> webfinger@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
> 
> 