Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

mnot.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#51

Post by hahajk »

eschatology wrote: post #10
einpoklum wrote: post #5

How well-known are those URIs though? :-\

I spent 10 minutes searching for one in the article, in the RFC, in the wikipedia page, on google, to search for a .well-known example. Couldn't find one. I did read one before while working with github oidc, and I did find it very useful. What is it with technical documentations that go deep describing what it is in plenty words but refusing to give a single example? This far from the first case I've ran into either…

I've been setting up some federated servers (Matrix, activitypub) and I ran into .well_known/ paths in many of them. Webfinger resolver for activitypub and a more custom matrix server-to-server federation endpoint.

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#52

Post by reddalo »

dspillett wrote: post #32
rickette wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs.txt is also nonsense since it isn't adopted by any of the major AI players.

The same could be said of robots.txt And anything else that might tell them not to access something.

robots.txt predates the modern web though

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#54

Post by pfannl »

rickette wrote: post #13
reddalo wrote: post #3

I wish people would follow this, instead of coming up with new standards in the root namespace. "llms.txt" [1] comes to mind, for example. Let's stop polluting the root of a domain! [1] https://llmstxt.org/

LLMs.txt is also nonsense since it isn't adopted by any of the major AI players.

To be fair, "not adopted by any major AI player" is probably the most web-standard-compliant phase of a new web standard.

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#55

Post by jnewton_dev »

notpushkin wrote: post #21
jvuygbbkuurx wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the website implements it. What about email preferences? Removing account links? There are many use-cases you might want to redirect a user to, but having to make their own well known for it seems dumb instead of using a more generic one. I guess the more flexible it is, the harder adoption becomes as the usage within a spec might diverge, or it grows outside of the spec and becomes unofficial. So maybe password-r…

It’s just easier for everybody to implement. Password manager opens https:// /.well-known/change-password in the user’s browser, it gets redirected to the actual page where password change form is located. You could make the password manager look it up in a link tree and then open a correct page, yes, but... > I guess the more flexible it is, the harder adoption becomes Yeah. If there is one account management relate…

[dead]

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#57

Post by jihadjihad »

amiga386 wrote: post #48
sandblast wrote: post #11

No, in fact I don't. But this post wouldn't be of any help anyway. It feels like it's about nothing, there is no substance, just stating some obvious facts. Without examples that lead to some real recommendations, this whole expertise claimed by the author is of no use.

> expertise claimed by the author The author is on record as trying to remove HTTP 418 "I'm a teapot" support from NodeJS, which resulted in backlash and Python adding support for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper_Text_Coffee_Pot_Control_...

Wow. Talk about a storm in a teapot...

Re: So You Want to Define a Well-Known URI

#59

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #58

"This Web site requires a more modern browser to operate securely; please upgrade your browser." Alternative, no SNI required https://web.archive.org/web/20260619061625if_/https://mnot.n...

SNI is good, though? I'm curious how you are running into this.
Post reply on HN