2010/3/25 Laurent Eschenauer <[email protected]>

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Blaine Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 24 March 2010 17:06, Sylvan Heuser <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> As I see it, we have two approaches between we must decide.
> >>
> >> The pure P2P approach:
> >> *snip*
> >>
> >> The network of independent servers with small user groups approach:
> >> *snip*
> >
> > I'd second the idea that there are hybrid approaches that are readily
> > possible. I think even in the hybrid case, you need a shared
> > addressing space. The reason you need a simple, shared addressing
> > space is so that people can add each-other on contact lists. Once you
> > have that, then two people who meet at a bar or on a bus can exchange
> > contact information.
>
> I second this. You can mix hub&spoke with P2P. In fact, this is what
> we aim to do in onesocialweb and is straightforwad using XMPP.
>
> My identity could either be:
>
> Hub&spoke: [email protected]
> In this case I delegate to the server the job of managing my profile,
> etc...
>
> P2P: [email protected]/me
> In this case, the work is delegated to a resource (could be a bot, my
> laptop, a mobile phone..). The server only acts as a router. The good
> thing with this last point is that you can use any existing XMPP
> account tomorrow with OSW. And yes, you could even drop the /me part
> and have XMPP Disco take care of telling the other end that your
> social networking stuff is handled by a resource called /me. So it is
> transparent to the user.
>
> Not sure how this would translate in a Webfinger/WebID world...
>

+1 for shared addressing space (global identifiers)

One issue with email style identifiers is that you cant natively dereference
them (ie with HTTP).  FingerPoint/WebFinger was invented as a work around
for this limitation ( fingerpoint is the one I would personally use ).  I
think Jabber/XMPP have their own technique to get more data from a JID.

A big advantage of FOAF / WebID, is that dereferncing the identifier is
straightforward, and aligned with the Web i.e. use HTTP.  This enables you
to find out more information about a user with ease, and without inventing a
new protocol, and you can even get back to the XMPP ID, email or even psyc
ID, as well as the list of friends (which are again dereferencable) etc.

For a centralised system for something with a large data center and high
performance webfinger server, the email style identifier, with translation,
seems reasonable.  However, I think that dereferencable (HTTP) global
identifiers and a decentralized systems are a great (and probably necessary)
match.

Reply via email to