[OpenID] Open Challenge to webfinger and XRD

Tue Oct 20 00:05:05 UTC 2009

Hello,

On Oct 19, 2009, at 7:06 PM, John Bradley wrote:

[...]

>
> LRDD is looking for a way to indicate that the XRD applies to the  
> DNS host as a whole rather than the URI. (For email, xmpp etc)

As I understand it, XRD describes the concept of a subject for the XRD  
document containing that subject identifier, and says that subjects  
are identified by URIs.

As an identifier, a URI may be used to identify anything you want.

In some cases (maybe a lot of them ;) the URI-as-identifier is also a  
URI-as-location-of-a-document. It would be easy for XRD to say that  
the subject URI MUST mean the URI at which the XRD document was found.  
But I believe it doesn't say that.

>
> You could make all http:// URL with no path "Special" but that stops  
> people from using XRD to describe the URL itself.  At least in the  
> openID case that would not work for many people.

A URI can identify anything, and in many cases, you can't tell what it  
identifies merely by looking at it - particularly when the URI is of  
the HTTP variety. In general, it is a bad idea to try.

If the use-case is simply to allow an XRD (LRDD?) processor to know  
that the subject URI is one that indicates the XRD is for a "DNS  
host" (warning: I don't know what the use-case actually is), the XRD  
<Subject> could presumably be extended (with an "anyAttribute") to say  
exactly that, and additionally say that a <Subject type='host'/> URI  
MUST have no path component (or that if there is a path component, it  
must be ignored by the processor if the subject type is 'host'). If  
the Subject "host" might not be a valid URI, you'd need to relax the  
anyURI restriction on Subject to allow that.

- johnk

>
> Regards
> John Bradley
>
>
>
> On 2009-10-19, at 7:43 PM, Santosh Rajan wrote:
>
>> What is the difference between "describing meta data of root http  
>> resource" and "describing meta data of the host" from a DNS point  
>> of view? None. They are the same. It can be described by a URI. "http://example.com 
>> ".
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Dirk Balfanz <balfanz at google.com>  
>> wrote:
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> http://hi.im/santosh
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general