Subject: Re: [webfinger] Vision for Webfinger - what are we doing?

From: Eric Mill <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:58:54 -0400

I channeled this into a blog post, if anyone's interested:

https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance

I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my prognosis
that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here. Webfinger needs
rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the energy of the rest of
the open web community.

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Eric Mill <[email-masked]> wrote:

> This is all helpful to hear, and I hope these all come to fruition,
> especially OpenID Connect. I'll take a stab at setting up my own OpenID
> Connect service on my domain and see how it feels.
>
> I guess it's inevitable that we have to hope the big companies make a
> meaningful gesture, too. Giving Google's outdated Webfinger endpoint<https://gmail.com/.well-known/host-meta> for
> Gmail a big update would be a great start.
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Paul E. Jones <[email-masked]>wrote:
>
>>  Eric,
>>
>> OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.  I still run my own OpenID OP server
>> and use it to log into some sites.  I still allow OpenID logins on
>> forums.packetizer.com, too.  It's still in use, but the large sites just
>> didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.  On its heels, though,
>> is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.  so, sure...
>> push it :-)
>>
>> Personally, I can think of a lot of good uses for WebFinger:
>> * When I log onto a web site, I want the site to grab my name an picture
>> automatically.
>> * If I want somebody to send me bitcoins, I'd much rather give them my
>> email address (and I do have that in my WF account)
>> * My contact info is published via WebFinger, so I don't have to give
>> people a lot of info on a business card
>> * WebFinger will hopefully be used as the starting point for
>> auto-provisioning of email clients or other devices and applications where
>> one has to enter server and port information
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> On 10/14/2013 11:21 PM, Eric Mill wrote:
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>>  I was at a hackathon<http://fedscoop.com/code-dc-calls-furloughed-feds/> today,
>> and spent the day working on Webfinger libraries for Sinatra<https://github.com/konklone/sinatra-webfinger>and
>> Jekyll <https://github.com/konklone/jekyll-webfinger>. It was really
>> productive, but -- at the end of the day, a reporter was there asking
>> everybody questions about their projects.
>>
>>  When he asked what Webfinger was for, I realized that the original
>> easy-to-communicate killer app for Webfinger, easing universal login
>> through OpenID, was<http://productblogarchive.37signals.com/products/2011/01/well-be-retiring-our-support-of-openid-on-may-1.html>
>> dead <https://www.myopenid.com/>. The only thing I could think to say
>> was "Remember OpenID? Before it died? Well, this is a piece of the puzzle
>> to putting something like that back together again."
>>
>>  That didn't feel like a very impressive answer. So, now that OpenID is
>> dead, what's the one line explanation for why Webfinger is important?
>> What's the path forward to making Webfinger something people are
>> incentivized to support?
>>
>>  Should we be pushing really hard to resuscitate OpenID via OpenID
>> Connect? Do we just need to wait for internal lobbying inside of
>> Google/Microsoft/Twitter/etc to pay off in some announcement? I know
>> Webfinger supports more than email lookup -- is there some particular
>> killer app people were envisioning when they lobbied for that feature?
>>
>>  I'm so happy there's finally an RFC, after so many years. I recognize
>> how much work was put in to make that happen, and this shouldn't be taken
>> as a criticism of anyone. I just want to know what others see for the
>> future of Webfinger, and what I should do next.
>>
>>  -- Eric
>>
>>  --
>>  konklone.com | @konklone <https://twitter.com/konklone>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webfinger mailing [email-masked]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webfinger mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> konklone.com | @konklone <https://twitter.com/konklone>
>

-- 
konklone.com | @konklone <https://twitter.com/konklone>

---

From: Bob Wyman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:13:40 -0400

Eric, you wrote:
"Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an email address. "

This isn't really accurate. It would be much better written as: "Webfinger
provides a standard mechanism that can be used to associate data with an
email address."

it is essential to understand that Webfinger is useful for much more than
the single use-case you discuss.

bob wyman

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Eric Mill <[email-masked]> wrote:

>>> forums.packetizer.com, too.  It's still in use, but the large sites
>>> just didn't have enough users using it, so they axed it.  On its heels,
>>> though, is now OpenID Connect and it will use WebFinger for discovery.  so,
>>> sure... push it :-)
>>>

---

From: Melvin Carvalho <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:14:29 +0100

> https://konklone.com/post/webfinger-gets-a-final-chance

Nice post.  It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.  It's
great that eran talks about http range 14.

+1 that your record has https

+1 that you set the mime type

I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but reuse
existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g.
vapour).  But you are free to choose what you prefer.

IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web than
ever.  Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own
identity pattern, but slowly but surely, the concept was put more and more
to the side.  At least openid in theory still allows it, even if the
practice is very different.  Persona does not allow it at all.

You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about email
addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now.  It's
about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference.  SWD was about email
addresses.

Overall I find myself agreeing with most of what you say :)

---

From: Eric Mill <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:49:19 -0400

I know I gloss over the non-email uses of Webfinger. It's just very far
from my original understanding of WF, and I don't know any uses out there
of WF for non-email URIs to mention. FWIW, I was more precise in the
definition I contributed
<https://github.com/webfinger/webfinger.net/pull/5>to the front
page of webfinger.net <http://webfinger.net/>: "A way to attach information
to an email address, or other online resource."

About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separate thread), when
I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to start a little
mapping file<https://github.com/konklone/sinatra-webfinger/blob/master/data/urns.yml>of
keywords to best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just
"name: 'Eric Mill'", etc.

Maybe it's worth factoring this out to its own tiny repo, and soliciting
contributions? I think in practice, most admin and user interaction with
Webfinger property names and link rel's should be through common names, not
literally pasting in whole URNs. I honestly can't be bothered to remember
them, or choose between them.

-- Eric

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
<[email-masked]>wrote:

> IMHO, decentralization didnt happen, we live in a more centralized web
> than ever.  Many people including Chris Messina advocated the host your own
> You seem to suggest that webfinger is about getting information about
> email addresses, although that was the original idea, but it's not now.
> It's about accounts at hosts, which is a subtle difference.  SWD was about
> email addresses.
>
>>>> * When I log onto a web site, I want the site to grab my name an
>>>> picture automatically.
>>>>  That didn't feel like a very impressive answer. So, now that OpenID
>>>> is dead, what's the one line explanation for why Webfinger is important?
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "WebFinger" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email-masked].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

---

From: Bob Wyman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:08:35 -0400

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Eric Mill <[email-masked]> wrote:

> of WF for non-email URIs to mention.
>

Imagine that you were running a service like Twitter that has accounts but
doesn't offer email service. In this case, you might use an acct: URI to
allow data to be associated with names of your accounts.

Imagine that you had a web page that allowed users to do some kind of a
search or perform some function upon filling out a form. But, you also
offered an API so that folk could write programs to accomplish the same
function without parsing HTML, etc. -- if only they knew the API protocol
or had a WSDL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Services_Description_Language>-like
document describing it. In that case, you could use WebFinger to return a
resource that described or pointed to the API that should be used with the
page. (i.e. this would be like a simple, distributed version of
UDDI<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Description_Discovery_and_Integration>
...)

etc. the uses are endless...

> FWIW, I was more precise in the definition I contributed<https://github.com/webfinger/webfinger.net/pull/5>to the front
> page of webfinger.net <http://webfinger.net/>: "A way to attach
> information to an email address, or other online resource."
>
> About the link relations (and maybe this should be a separate thread),
> when I was making sinatra-webfinger, I realized it was useful to start a little
> mapping file<https://github.com/konklone/sinatra-webfinger/blob/master/data/urns.yml>of keywords to best-practice URNs. That way, my configuration was just
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho <[email-masked]
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nice post.  It's actually worth rereading Eran's post on this topic.
>> It's great that eran talks about http range 14.
>>
>>> I imagine it's going to rankle some people who disagree with my
>>> prognosis that some things are dead, but it's how it feels from here.
>>> Webfinger needs rapid experimentation, high profile adoption, and the
>>> energy of the rest of the open web community.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>  I'm so happy there's finally an RFC, after so many years. I
>>>>> recognize how much work was put in to make that happen, and this shouldn't
>>>>> be taken as a criticism of anyone. I just want to know what others see for
>>>>> the future of Webfinger, and what I should do next.
>>>>>
>>>>>  -- Eric
>>>>>
>>>>>  --

---

From: Eric Mill <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:34:18 -0400

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Bob Wyman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> doesn't offer email service. In this case, you
>
might use an acct: URI to allow data to be associated with names of your
> accounts.

The Twitter example makes it click for me, thank you. I added "or other
account" to my post. In practice, I think that's more likely to empower
"Sign in With Twitter" in a standards-oriented way than it is to empower
federated identity, but that's important too.

-- Eric

> page. (i.e. this would be like a simple, distributed version of UDDI<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Description_Discovery_and_Integration>
> ...)
>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I personally would *not* use the webfinger.net link relations, but
>>> reuse existing predicates such as FOAF, which passes W3C validation (e.g.
>>>>>> OpenID is not entirely dead, yet.  I still run my own OpenID OP
>>>>>> server and use it to log into some sites.  I still allow OpenID logins on
>>>>>> * If I want somebody to send me bitcoins, I'd much rather give them
>>>>>> my email address (and I do have that in my WF account)
>>>>>> dead <https://www.myopenid.com/>. The only thing I could think to
>>>>>> say was "Remember OpenID? Before it died? Well, this is a piece of the
>>>>>> puzzle to putting something like that back together again."
>>>>>>
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "WebFinger" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email-masked].

---

From: Kingsley Idehen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:37:01 -0400

On 11/1/13 11:13 AM, Bob Wyman wrote:
> Eric, you wrote:
> "Webfinger is a standard way to attach information to an email address."
>
> This isn't really accurate. It would be much better written as: 
> "Webfinger provides a standard mechanism that can be used to associate 
> data with an email address."
As far as I know:

Webfinger enables the use of mailto: scheme (I think), acct: scheme, and 
http: scheme (I think) as identifiers that *denote* (or "refer to") 
agents (e.g., people, organizations, and other entities capable of 
mechanized behavior) in a manner that also *identifies* the location of 
their descriptors (documents that describe the aforementioned entities).

Links:

[1] Denotation -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/denotation .
[2] Identification -- 
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/identification .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen