I may have missed this decision, but I can’t find the canonical HTML versions of the UMA specifications. If you go to the Kantara page, all of the links point to the PDF versions, which require you to fill out a form to download. This is problematic for me on a number of levels, not the least of which that I need a URL to reference the specification from another specification — in my case, HEART. If we do have canonical HTML versions, what are the URLs? And is it possible to get links to those put up in all the places that I looked for them (the WG homepage, the Kantara recommendations page, etc). If we do not have canonical HTML versions and only have the PDF versions, why not? And why did we make this horrible decision, and how can we reverse it? :) — Justin
You can actually find the links to the HTML versions in the normative references from/to each other in the specs’ References sections. https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2.0.html https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2.0.... The PDF versions are “official” so that Kantara can track downloads and therefore interest in a very rough way, but as you can see, the HTML versions are actually normative. In fact, the PDF versions were created from the HTML versions by capturing a “Print” from them. And I’ve been giving HTML deep links to IANA and putting them in the Release Notes too. You can point to individual PDF URLs as follows if you want to. :) https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2-0-pdf/ https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2... (I myself am not a fan of PDF specs either, but do find the reports of downloads somewhat useful!...) Eve Maler (sent from my iPad) | cell +1 425 345 6756
On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:
I may have missed this decision, but I can’t find the canonical HTML versions of the UMA specifications. If you go to the Kantara page, all of the links point to the PDF versions, which require you to fill out a form to download. This is problematic for me on a number of levels, not the least of which that I need a URL to reference the specification from another specification — in my case, HEART.
If we do have canonical HTML versions, what are the URLs? And is it possible to get links to those put up in all the places that I looked for them (the WG homepage, the Kantara recommendations page, etc).
If we do not have canonical HTML versions and only have the PDF versions, why not? And why did we make this horrible decision, and how can we reverse it? :)
— Justin _______________________________________________ WG-UMA mailing list WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma
That’s a really, really roundabout way to find the links, but thanks for grabbing them for me. I think this setup is a mistake on Kantara’s part. They are sacrificing usability of the specs for the sake of their metrics, and that this should be changed. Who at Kantara can fix this? — Justin
On Feb 19, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Eve Maler <eve@xmlgrrl.com> wrote:
You can actually find the links to the HTML versions in the normative references from/to each other in the specs’ References sections.
https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2.0.html <https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2.0.html> https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2.0.... <https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2.0.html>
The PDF versions are “official” so that Kantara can track downloads and therefore interest in a very rough way, but as you can see, the HTML versions are actually normative. In fact, the PDF versions were created from the HTML versions by capturing a “Print” from them. And I’ve been giving HTML deep links to IANA and putting them in the Release Notes too.
You can point to individual PDF URLs as follows if you want to. :)
https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2-0-pdf/ <https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2-0-pdf/> https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2... <https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2-0-pdf/>
(I myself am not a fan of PDF specs either, but do find the reports of downloads somewhat useful!...)
Eve Maler (sent from my iPad) | cell +1 425 345 6756
On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu <mailto:jricher@mit.edu>> wrote:
I may have missed this decision, but I can’t find the canonical HTML versions of the UMA specifications. If you go to the Kantara page, all of the links point to the PDF versions, which require you to fill out a form to download. This is problematic for me on a number of levels, not the least of which that I need a URL to reference the specification from another specification — in my case, HEART.
If we do have canonical HTML versions, what are the URLs? And is it possible to get links to those put up in all the places that I looked for them (the WG homepage, the Kantara recommendations page, etc).
If we do not have canonical HTML versions and only have the PDF versions, why not? And why did we make this horrible decision, and how can we reverse it? :)
— Justin _______________________________________________ WG-UMA mailing list WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org> https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma <https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma>
I can fix this - I'm conversing with Eve on what's needed. I think we can find a balance between the publication channels and the access channels. *Andrew Hughes *CISM CISSP Independent Consultant *In Turn Information Management Consulting* o +1 650.209.7542 m +1 250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ *Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security * On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:
That’s a really, really roundabout way to find the links, but thanks for grabbing them for me.
I think this setup is a mistake on Kantara’s part. They are sacrificing usability of the specs for the sake of their metrics, and that this should be changed. Who at Kantara can fix this?
— Justin
On Feb 19, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Eve Maler <eve@xmlgrrl.com> wrote:
You can actually find the links to the HTML versions in the normative references from/to each other in the specs’ References sections.
https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2.0.html https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz- 2.0.html
The PDF versions are “official” so that Kantara can track downloads and therefore interest in a very rough way, but as you can see, the HTML versions are actually normative. In fact, the PDF versions were created from the HTML versions by capturing a “Print” from them. And I’ve been giving HTML deep links to IANA and putting them in the Release Notes too.
You can point to individual PDF URLs as follows if you want to. :)
https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2-0-pdf/ https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma- federated-authz-2-0-pdf/
(I myself am not a fan of PDF specs either, but do find the reports of downloads somewhat useful!...)
Eve Maler (sent from my iPad) | cell +1 425 345 6756 <(425)%20345-6756>
On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:
I may have missed this decision, but I can’t find the canonical HTML versions of the UMA specifications. If you go to the Kantara page, all of the links point to the PDF versions, which require you to fill out a form to download. This is problematic for me on a number of levels, not the least of which that I need a URL to reference the specification from another specification — in my case, HEART.
If we do have canonical HTML versions, what are the URLs? And is it possible to get links to those put up in all the places that I looked for them (the WG homepage, the Kantara recommendations page, etc).
If we do not have canonical HTML versions and only have the PDF versions, why not? And why did we make this horrible decision, and how can we reverse it? :)
— Justin _______________________________________________ WG-UMA mailing list WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma
_______________________________________________ WG-UMA mailing list WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma
+1 Justin John Wunderlich, Sent frum a mobile device, Pleez 4give speling erurz "...a world of near-total surveillance and endless record-keeping is likely to be one with less liberty, less experimentation, and certainly far less joy..." A. Michael Froomkin ________________________________ From: WG-UMA <wg-uma-bounces@kantarainitiative.org> on behalf of Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 5:04:21 PM To: Eve Maler Cc: wg-uma@kantarainitiative.org UMA Subject: Re: [WG-UMA] Spec Locations That’s a really, really roundabout way to find the links, but thanks for grabbing them for me. I think this setup is a mistake on Kantara’s part. They are sacrificing usability of the specs for the sake of their metrics, and that this should be changed. Who at Kantara can fix this? — Justin On Feb 19, 2018, at 2:04 PM, Eve Maler <eve@xmlgrrl.com<mailto:eve@xmlgrrl.com>> wrote: You can actually find the links to the HTML versions in the normative references from/to each other in the specs’ References sections. https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2.0.html https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/wg/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2.0.... The PDF versions are “official” so that Kantara can track downloads and therefore interest in a very rough way, but as you can see, the HTML versions are actually normative. In fact, the PDF versions were created from the HTML versions by capturing a “Print” from them. And I’ve been giving HTML deep links to IANA and putting them in the Release Notes too. You can point to individual PDF URLs as follows if you want to. :) https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-grant-2-0-pdf/ https://kantarainitiative.org/file-downloads/rec-oauth-uma-federated-authz-2... (I myself am not a fan of PDF specs either, but do find the reports of downloads somewhat useful!...) Eve Maler (sent from my iPad) | cell +1 425 345 6756 On Feb 19, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu<mailto:jricher@mit.edu>> wrote: I may have missed this decision, but I can’t find the canonical HTML versions of the UMA specifications. If you go to the Kantara page, all of the links point to the PDF versions, which require you to fill out a form to download. This is problematic for me on a number of levels, not the least of which that I need a URL to reference the specification from another specification — in my case, HEART. If we do have canonical HTML versions, what are the URLs? And is it possible to get links to those put up in all the places that I looked for them (the WG homepage, the Kantara recommendations page, etc). If we do not have canonical HTML versions and only have the PDF versions, why not? And why did we make this horrible decision, and how can we reverse it? :) — Justin _______________________________________________ WG-UMA mailing list WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org> https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma -- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
participants (4)
-
Andrew Hughes -
Eve Maler -
John Wunderlich -
Justin Richer