Yes, for Higgins it's probably better to wait until the XRI TC and Neustar
have moved to XRD.

The xri2xrd.net service isn't meant for systems that understand XRI/XDI/XRDS
anyway.
It's designed to provide compatibility with other systems that understand
LRDD/XRD but don't know anything about XRI/XDI/XRDS.

E.g. to fulfill SWAT0.

Markus

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Paul Trevithick <[email protected]>wrote:

> Markus,
>
> 1) I had thought now that XRD was stable that this was an opportunity for
> Higgins to update its resolution code to use XRD instead of XRDS.
>
> 2) I had also thought that we could drop support for xri 2.0 syntax and
> just (for simplicity) support xri 3.0. However after talking to Drummond
> just now he reminded me that xri.net has not yet been updated to support
> xri 3.0 syntax and thus it would be better to wait on this change.
>
> In fact if I understood Drummond he suggested it would be better to wait on
> 1) AND 2) above and make all the changes at once in a few months when the
> XRI TC had progressed and Neustar had upgraded.
>
> --Paul
>
> On Aug 8, 2010, at 3:09 AM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>
> Yes, XRI Resolution has to be updated to support XRD instead of XRDS.
>
> In the meantime, there's a service that can resolve XRIs and map their XRDS
> to an XRD.
> Example: http://xri2xrd.net/=markus
>
> A standard LRDD resolver starting with
> http://xri.net/=markus
> should correctly discover the XRD for =markus.
>
> For Higgins, this means that the UDI resolver (higgins.idas.udi) could
> probably be simplified to use LRDD for both XRIs and URIs, instead of using
> XRI Resolution for the format and Yadis for the latter.
>
> Markus
>
> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Paul Trevithick <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:
>>
>>
>>> *1) UDIs not URNs*
>>>
>>> EntityIDs are supposed to be resource UDIs not URNs. So after we correct
>>> that error in our XDI then the entityIDs will look like this:
>>>
>>>  =mydex....@alice/$context$xdi+home+and+family//=alice
>>>
>>
>>> Where
>>>
>>>    - =mydex is the name of the PDS operator
>>>    - @alice is the community name assigned to alice by Mydex
>>>
>>> This is not correct. @alice is a global organization i-name. This should
>> be *alice.
>>
>>
>> Oops, of course! I knew that :-)
>>
>>
>>>    - $context indicates that we're looking for a "context" service
>>>    endpoint in the LDDR/XRD
>>>    - $xdi indicates that this entityID can be accessed over XDI
>>>    - +home+and+family is the id of the context
>>>
>>> It's been so long since I've worked with UDIs and UDI resolution that I
>> can't answer this. Markus will have to. However service endpoint selection
>> is no longer part of XRD (as opposed to XRDS), so I think there's going to
>> be an issue here one way or another.
>>
>>
>> The intent of the UDI term was not to invent anything new. The intent was
>> to have a word that meant "either XRI resolution or Linked Data URI or <some
>> other std discoverable reference>"
>>
>> So WRT XRI-UDIs our intent was to track whatever XRI resolution is defined
>> to be per the latest thoughts of the XRI TC. It sounds like you're saying
>> that the XRI resolution spex haven't been revised to work with XRD (as
>> opposed to XRDS). Is that right?
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> higgins-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> <ATT00001..c>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev

Reply via email to