Re: Request for well-known URI: associations.json

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 04 June 2015 03:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4779D1B33FC for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 20:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xwfL_CJNj6yy for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 20:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACDEC1B33FA for <wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 20:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.3] (unknown [120.149.147.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DB4C22E25F; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 23:51:23 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Subject: Re: Request for well-known URI: associations.json
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABP3xjwphVFR8uRN=gXOPni+Zk4hEy4mz=Ni-Dgsk57f_cimdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 13:51:21 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D9267479-D98E-47F9-B69F-D0D10BD85693@mnot.net>
References: <CABP3xjyV80p2Y2rj6JUSKAro1vRziSntUmQPzM06g563h8J4jw@mail.gmail.com> <4820CA4B-C98B-4CC8-BDE5-83A5C7A5CE57@mnot.net> <CABP3xjy5NwgT4TSUs8Pksdp-3jXKyTUaUQyWYHi0M4D4KO_ZxA@mail.gmail.com> <CABP3xjx+UeOL0NdKgzThTTZrKvqTjD3eUrEUhzQJjev0soWjSQ@mail.gmail.com> <AACC2DB3-ED7A-467A-8C41-378A15B8B24B@mnot.net> <CABP3xjwG3QaDwDb_esCjvzV8jjTQNVwDMRno0qGFfibTPV9K2Q@mail.gmail.com> <836AF9CF-6271-4670-B309-9EEBF772AB66@mnot.net> <CABP3xjwv1rAFgtqra40+VpZgeoo923g3iftMZFd7iu6qLjJj5w@mail.gmail.com> <CABP3xjwHy5VPDH6btPTL_0Ptcy+eJ5mH2TVS7oehebopzU24vw@mail.gmail.com> <CABP3xjwphVFR8uRN=gXOPni+Zk4hEy4mz=Ni-Dgsk57f_cimdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wellknown-uri-review/OOWTMVMx3T1PHfWliTe306nY3Yw>
Cc: Umesh Shankar <ushankar@google.com>, wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Well-Known URI review list <wellknown-uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wellknown-uri-review/>
List-Post: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 03:51:29 -0000

Hi Patrick,

Sorry for the delay. That sounds fine.

Can you put the spec at a stable URL? It's fine if it gets updated.

Thanks,


> On 28 May 2015, at 11:29 am, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> friendly ping :)  -- how does assetlinks.json sound?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Patrick
> 
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> after conferring with the team, we would like to request "assetlinks.json".  Thanks for bearing with us while we make up our minds.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> We wanted something short, but we absolutely see your point about it being generic. asset_statements.json doesn't sound too bad, but it's quite long and we worry that people will get confused about whether there is a dash or an underscore in the name. Does "assetlinks.json" or even simply "assetlinks" sound acceptable to you?
> 
> Thanks,
> Patrick
> On May 21, 2015 1:05 AM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> Thanks.
> 
> "statements.json" does indeed seem very generic; is there a reason you're not using something like "asset_statements.json"?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> 
> > On 20 May 2015, at 8:38 pm, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > apologies -- I had read your earlier email as "you're good to go; just send us the spec when your product launches".  That's entirely my fault.
> >
> > We've prepared a spec and it's attached as a PDF file.  It's still in a somewhat rough shape, but should have all the important pieces.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > Hi Patrick,
> >
> > Again, having the spec is the next necessary step. I can't really comment on the name until I've seen it — although "statements" is *extremely* generic.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 15 May 2015, at 1:06 am, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi again,
> > >
> > > our project has evolved a bit.  We would still like to store information about the relationship between online assets, but the information is going to be encoded in the form of "statements".  Therefore, we think a more fitting name would now be:
> > >
> > >   .well-known/statements.json
> > >
> > > Do we still have your preliminary approval for this new name?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Mark,
> > >
> > > Thanks!  We will let you know.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Patrick
> > > On Mar 31, 2015 8:52 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > > Hi Patrick,
> > >
> > > Sure. Best thing to do is to ping this list once your spec becomes public (even in draft form), and we’ll do the registration.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 1 Apr 2015, at 5:20 am, Patrick Stahlberg <pstahlb@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I am writing on behalf of a team at Google working on new ways to surface associations between web sites and other online "assets".  For a planned launch, we would like to register the well-known URI "associations.json" as requested in RFC 5785.
> > > >
> > > > We would like to ask web site owners to publish a file at this location that follows a simple JSON format and that includes information about other assets that are related to the site on which the associations.json is published.  We plan for the format to be open and usable by anyone.  We would like to publish a full specification of the format once we have enough confidence internally in its design.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Patrick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > wellknown-uri-review mailing list
> > > > wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <AssetLinksWell-KnownURISpec.pdf>_______________________________________________
> > wellknown-uri-review mailing list
> > wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/