On 25 September 2012 16:07, Henry Story <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 25 Sep 2012, at 16:45, Stephen Kent <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Henry, >> >>>> WebID is not in the charter for this WG. If you want to discuss S/MIME and >>>> WebID, you are free to do so elsewhere, of course. There is no need for >>>> you to Cc this WG on that work. >>> Neither I suppose is TLS, or MIME btw, or many other standards that are >>> discussed on this list. But knowing that they exist has always been >>> important to IETF practice. It's called: not re-inventing the wheel. But I >>> see you have a problem with that. Sorry to have hurt your feelings. >> If you were to read the DANE charter >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dane/charter/) >> you would see that TLS is cited 5 times, so your supposition above is wrong >> with regard to >> its first assertion. > > Thanks. But not MIME - So the point holds well enough :-) > > Anyway, the webid spec > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/ > > also is very clearly tied to TLS, and would benefit a lot from DANE being > deployed. So my interest in DANE is not a side issue. The strongest pushback > against WebID ( and so using client certificates ) is the cost of server > certificates for most players.
You mean people who aren't using HTTPS to secure logins care about WebID? > ( the next strongest is the inability to logout from all but Firefox browsers > ) Am I really the only one who cares about usability? _______________________________________________ dane mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
