privacy: Difference between revisions

From Microformats Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Privacy and microformats (discussion? resources?))
 
(solve simpler problems first)
 
Line 8: Line 8:
use microformats on a ''private'' scale. Does it really make sense?
use microformats on a ''private'' scale. Does it really make sense?
I'm wondering aloud. Please comment.
I'm wondering aloud. Please comment.
* In [[microformats]] one of our [[principles]] is to solve simpler problems first.  Thus first we are solving the problem of public [[social-network-portability]] which really only requires [[hcard|hCard]] and [[xfn|XFN]].  For private authenticated access, the next steps are [[openid]] and [[oauth]].  And of course there is a plenty of "private web" supported today using HTTP, HTTP-AUTH, HTTPS - it makes sense to leverage those, rather than needlessly reinvent them. [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 18:47, 6 Sep 2007 (PDT)

Latest revision as of 01:47, 7 September 2007

Privacy and microformats

<lynX> It's the one thing you can't do with microformats, right? Or rather.. the web, the HTTP protocol, you'd first need to have a private web where we publish things just for our friends or our social network applications to implement the social-network-portability thing. Only then can we use microformats on a private scale. Does it really make sense? I'm wondering aloud. Please comment.

  • In microformats one of our principles is to solve simpler problems first. Thus first we are solving the problem of public social-network-portability which really only requires hCard and XFN. For private authenticated access, the next steps are openid and oauth. And of course there is a plenty of "private web" supported today using HTTP, HTTP-AUTH, HTTPS - it makes sense to leverage those, rather than needlessly reinvent them. Tantek 18:47, 6 Sep 2007 (PDT)