[OpenID] Open Challenge to webfinger and XRD

Mon Oct 19 22:20:28 UTC 2009

XRD prescribes an (optional) Subject element, which is a URI. The URI in the
Subject element is the URI of the resource that is described by this XRD.

So,

<Subject>http://example.com</Subject> // describes meta data of root http
resource in example.com
<Subject>http://example.com/</Subject> // describes meta data of root http
resource in example.com

which leaves us with the question of how to say "this document describes
meta-data data for the host example.com". The current thinking for host-meta
is to say something like

<Host>example.com</Host> // describes meta-data of host example.com

where the Host element is a string, not a URI. For some background, see
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200908/msg00127.html and responses.

Regarding civility: all-caps is not very polite. calling people idiots is
not very polite (well, I guess you merely implied it). using lots of
exclamation marks is not very polite.

Cheers,

Dirk.

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Santosh Rajan <santrajan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,Let me get this strait here. I am unable to participate in the
> OASIS discussions because I haven't figured the process yet. And in any case
> all this has a bearing on OpenID, (it is the no 1 use case).
> What you are saying is
> 1) The host-meta will (MUST) have a <Subject> Element which will be the
> domain URL of the host. There will be no <Host> element instead.
> 2) (This is not something you have said explicitly) . All XRD's including
> host-meta "MUST" have "1" <Subject> element as an immediate child element of
> the XRD Root whose value is a URI describing the subject of the XRD.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 3:04 AM, John Bradley <ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com> wrote:
>
>> Santosh,
>>
>> That was a thread on the use of signing elements in <Link> elements.
>>
>> Dirk's use of <Host> in his example XRD is not valid XRD syntax.
>>
>> It wasn't commented on because it was not the topic of the email thread.
>>
>> If you have comments on the XRD spec.
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/34724/xrd-1.0-wd09.html
>>
>> You are welcome to submit them through the formal process.
>>
>> Regards
>> John Bradley
>>
>> On 2009-10-19, at 5:51 PM, Santosh Rajan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi John,
>>> The last time I saw an example of an XRD host-meta is here on 15th Oct
>>> here
>>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200910/msg00055.html
>>>
>>> It has a <Host> instead of <Subject>. If you are saying that it is not
>>> part
>>> of the XRD spec and it is part of the host-meta spec, it still doesnt
>>> change
>>> my argument. As an end-user of the the discovery mechanism the effect is
>>> still the same for me.
>>>
>>> You say you have a hard time following me! Isn't it a case of the pot
>>> calling the kettle black? How many people are going to follow what you
>>> have
>>> said bellow. I will only quote one sentence you have written and ignore
>>> the
>>> rest.
>>>
>>> "The Subject of a XRD is the <Subject> of the XRD there can be 0 or 1
>>> in an XRD."
>>>
>>> That is exactly what you said. Now tell me how can there be a "0"
>>> <Subject>
>>> for an XRD. What meaning does an XRD have with "0" <Subject>?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Bradley-9 wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Santosh,
>>>>
>>>> I am having a hard time following your point.
>>>>
>>>> This is the current draft of the XRD spec.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/34724/xrd-1.0-wd09.html
>>>>
>>>> There is no <Host>  element in the spec.
>>>>
>>>> The Subject of a XRD is the <Subject> of the XRD there can be 0 or 1
>>>> in an XRD.
>>>>
>>>> HostMeta is a spec that uses the OASIS XRD spec.
>>>>
>>>> I know that they want to have what is essentially an abstract Subject.
>>>>
>>>> ie one that is about the host and not the URI.
>>>>
>>>> This is a URL problem and not an XRI one.
>>>>
>>>> Any number of wars have been fought over how to represent non-
>>>> information resources with URI.
>>>>
>>>> We did give the group working on host-meta as a itef spec some options
>>>> on how they might do that.
>>>>
>>>> Using the DNS scheme or a URI fragment are all possibilities.  I don't
>>>> know if they have come to a conclusion.   Whatever they decide someone
>>>> will be unhappy if history is anything to go by on this topic.
>>>>
>>>> There is a public review period for XRD coming up and a process for
>>>> you to make formal submissions if you want to have input but not join
>>>> the TC.
>>>>
>>>> John B.
>>>>
>>>> On 2009-10-19, at 3:27 PM, Santosh Rajan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> This is an Open Challenge i am sending to the webfinger, XRD forums.
>>>>> These
>>>>> guys really think I am an Idiot. "Maybe I am". "BUT I AM NOT GOING
>>>>> DOWN
>>>>> WITHOUT A FIGHT".
>>>>>
>>>>> Really, I really don't know. Let us hear the arguments they give.
>>>>> Maybe i am
>>>>> a brainless stupid, that is why i feel all of them are hollow. But
>>>>> let them
>>>>> prove I am stupid. "IF THEY CAN", IF they can, we will hand it to
>>>>> them, "THE
>>>>> IDENTITY OSCAR".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,I know you guys don't like to hear from me. I have been told
>>>>> so much.
>>>>> By your moderators. That people on this forum are not "Happy" to
>>>>> hear from
>>>>> me.
>>>>> Like it or "NOT" you are going to hear from me. I am not sure if
>>>>> this post
>>>>> of mine will be allowed to be published. But let us see.
>>>>> I have so many grouses with "XRD" and today I am going to start with
>>>>> my
>>>>> first grouse. Since WebFinger by definition is going to follow XRD,
>>>>> don't
>>>>> argue with me about webfinger. Lets talk about XRD to start with me.
>>>>> I am throwing a challenge to all the XRD guys. Prove to me that the
>>>>> <Subject> of an XRD host-meta document has to be <Host> instead of
>>>>> <Subject>. If you "smart" guys can prove this to me, I will agree
>>>>> that "I am
>>>>> a complete Idiot". If "NOT" all of you web fingerer's and XRD's are
>>>>> Idiots!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> Santosh Rajan
>>>>> http://santrajan.blogspot.com http://santrajan.blogspot.com
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Open-Challenge-to-webfinger-and-XRD-tp25963216p25963216.html
>>>>> Sent from the OpenID - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> general mailing list
>>>>> general at lists.openid.net
>>>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> general mailing list
>>>> general at lists.openid.net
>>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> Santosh Rajan
>>> http://santrajan.blogspot.com http://santrajan.blogspot.com
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Open-Challenge-to-webfinger-and-XRD-tp25963216p25965303.html
>>> Sent from the OpenID - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> general mailing list
>>> general at lists.openid.net
>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> http://hi.im/santosh
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20091019/b071d190/attachment-0001.htm>