ISSUE-55: explore WebID URI-schema openness
uri-schema-openess
explore WebID URI-schema openness
- State:
- POSTPONED
- Product:
- WebID-conceptual-spec
- Raised by:
- Henry Story
- Opened on:
- 2011-04-19
- Description:
- The WebID protocol should be open to other URL schemas than HTTP/S . Or should it just make sure it does not exclude their future development ? (HTML 1 did not have all the features of HTML4 but it did not exclude HTML4 from happening, or even XML or n3 or json from coming on the scene.)
In any case logically the WebID protocol should require the WebID to be dereferenced using the canonical dereferencing method for the URL Schema. For http this is the HTTP protocol, for https:// the https protocol.
The simplest protocol to add would be FTP. Thinking about ftp or even including it when writing the spec could be a good way to find hardcoded URL schema presuppositions in the docs. - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from erich@ebremer.com on 2013-03-29)
- Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-03-22)
- Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from kidehen@openlinksw.com on 2013-03-22)
- Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from kidehen@openlinksw.com on 2013-03-22)
- Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from melvincarvalho@gmail.com on 2013-03-22)
- WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional (from tthibodeau@openlinksw.com on 2013-03-22)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday March 08 2013 15:00UTC (from tthibodeau@openlinksw.com on 2013-03-01)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 22 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-26)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 22 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-22)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC (from andrei.sambra@gmail.com on 2013-02-18)
- Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 22 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-18)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC (from sergio.fernandez@salzburgresearch.at on 2013-02-18)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-18)
- Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC (from andrei.sambra@gmail.com on 2013-02-18)
- Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-18)
- Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 8 2013 15:00UTC (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2013-02-07)
- Re: self-signed (from andrei@fcns.eu on 2011-04-19)
- ISSUE-55: WebID schema agnosticims (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: self-signed (from kidehen@openlinksw.com on 2011-04-19)
- Re: WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: SSUE-55 URL Schema Agnosticism - Danbri's proposal (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: self-signed (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: self-signed (from danbri@danbri.org on 2011-04-19)
- Re: WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from kidehen@openlinksw.com on 2011-04-19)
- Re: WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from kidehen@openlinksw.com on 2011-04-19)
- webId schema agnosticism was: self-signed (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- Re: WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from henry.story@bblfish.net on 2011-04-19)
- WebID-ISSUE-55 (schema-openess): explore WebID schema agnosticims (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2011-04-19)
Related notes:
Background reading: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
"There is a lot of flexibility and growth to be gained by allowing any sort of URI, not one from a particular scheme, in most circumstances. Similarly, one should not make assumptions about the schemes involved. This is a facet of the particular parameters about how the technology is used. The choice of type URI in a pracical use of a language is an important flexibility point."
The restriction on http URIs was voted for formally in the http hash vote
https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/
apart from being agreed at TPAC 2012, and on numerous other occasions. Enlarging the scope to any URIs will require a lot more work than what the current group is capable of doing.
The work here should not restrict the ability of other schemes to identify agents, but it need not take on the task of working at the greater level of generality.
Furthermore there is no consensus to do so.
This issue was postponed to a potential working group http://www.w3.org/2013/02/22-webid-minutes.html
Henry Story, 26 Feb 2013, 10:46:16As was discussed in the 2013-02-22 call, the *Conceptual* Spec should be based on "dereferenceable URIs", not just HTTP URIs. (SPDY made a difference in Henry's vocal consideration at the time; FTP, LDAP, and other schemes which "Web browsers" transparently handle are also worth remembering.)
See --
- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#dereference-uri
- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#URI-scheme
- http://www.w3.org/wiki/UriSchemes
- http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/NameMyth.html
The current Functional Spec (WebID-over-TLS) may reasonably be limited to HTTP URIs, as this will make immediate implementation easier for pioneering developers, but won't block future innovation and expanded implementation of the WebID concept.
Display change log