Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] WebFinger vs SWD

From: Christian Weiske <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:14:12 +0200

Hello Paul,

> There is a current debate over what the appropriate technology is to
> go forward with service discovery.  On one hand, we have WebFinger,
> which is documented in RFC 6415 and
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger.  On the
> other hand, there is "Simple Web Discovery" (SWD) which appeared on
> the scene with a new OpenID protocol called "OpenID Connect".  You
> can read the draft here:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-simple-web-discovery.
> 
> Personally, I prefer WebFinger, as I suspect most of you do who have
> been working in this area for a few years.  It would be good to hear
> voices of those who support the continued work on WebFinger on the
> Applications Area WG list.  

The big plusses for WebFinger in my eyes are:
- WebFinger may be served from static files, while SWD requires an
  dynamic application behind the URL
- It's possible to return multiple data at once with WF, and actually
  *discover* supported services - with SWD, you have to know the
  service beforehand.

-- 
Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Weiske

-=≡ Geeking around in the name of science since 1982 ≡=-