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

[Patrick Stahlberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mark,

apologies again; it took longer than expected.  But we now have our spec at
a stable URL.  Please take a look, and let us know if there are other
things we should do to complete the registration.

https://github.com/google/digitalassetlinks/blob/master/well-known/spec.txt
https://github.com/google/digitalassetlinks/blob/master/well-known/specification.md


Thanks,
Patrick


On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Patrick Stahlberg <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Thanks, Mark!
>
> Yes, we will clean the spec up and host it at a stable URL.  We will need
> a few days to do that, but I will let you know when it's done.
>
>
> --
> Patrick
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Mark,
>> >
>> > friendly ping :)  -- how does assetlinks.json sound?
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Patrick
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Patrick Stahlberg <[e-mail]>
>> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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" <[e-mail]> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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 <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>> > > > Hi Mark,
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks!  We will let you know.
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Patrick
>> > > > On Mar 31, 2015 8:52 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <[e-mail]> 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 <[e-mail]>
>> 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
>> > > > > [e-mail]
>> > > > > 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
>> > > [e-mail]
>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>>
>>
>