[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Freedombox-discuss] FOAF developers taking FreedomBox into their equation

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:04:44PM +0100, bertagaz at ptitcanardnoir.org 
>On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 03:21:04PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 01:27:17PM +0100, bertagaz at ptitcanardnoir.org 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >So why in your previous mail are you saying we can?
>> Sorry.  I meant to say that I _believe_ we can.
>> I live in a dream of FOAF being super relevant for FreedomBox.  What 
>> I meant to say with my final remark was that if you aim sharp and 
>> clever challenging questions at me, then you are shooting at a 
>> messenger: You may kill my dreams and thereby my preaching of this 
>> technology at this mailinglist, but if your intent is to verify 
>> solidity of the actual technology (not my dreams of it) then aim at 
>> the source - at those actually knowing what they are putting 
>> together.
>> I encourage those interested in the details of WebID to engage at the 
>> foaf-protocols mailinglist, and that we here on this list discuss if 
>> and how it may be relevant to integrate WebID with other facets of 
>> FreedomBox - only summarizing on those aspects discussed in-depth at 
>> that more appropriate list.
>Sorry too, then. I assumed that you had reasons to have this dream 
>because you trusted this technology based on solid ideas of it, and 
>then that being on this mailing-list and disussing if/how it may be 
>relevant to freedombox, you might enlighten me end the others. My 
>question weren't intended to kill anyone or his/her dreams, just to 
>participate to this discussion/decision.

Uhm, I think we are drifting away from the topic here.

I do _not_ feel that you in particular are killing my dream.  I tried 
explain that challenging what I wrote would not really challenge WebID 
but challenge my poor presentation of it.  I do _not_ feel that you are 
challenging me or it here :-)

Yes, I trust the sanity of the design of WebID.  But is not equal to me 
being capable of defending that sanity which I believe in, towards 
clever folks on this mailinglist.  Therefore I attempted to encourage 
taking clever debates about sanity of the protocol at the very 
mailinglist where those architects of it hang out, rather than here.

(Parallel to this little subthread I notice that others apparently 
disagree with me and prefer to discuss inner details of WebID here 
rather than there.  Oh well.)

Great that your interest is in discussing how WebID is usable with 
FreedomBox.  I'd be more than happy to get back on that track :-)

So please try again...!

   - Jonas

   * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
   * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

   [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20110310/d0c0857e/attachment-0001.pgp>

Reply to: