Discussion for Host-Meta feature At Risk

[aaronpk]

This issue is a placeholder for discussion of the "At Risk" feature of host-meta based hub discovery.

https://w3c.github.io/websub/#discovery

The working group knows of no publishers that depend solely on the host-meta based discovery, and believes that all publishers offer discovery in either of the two other ways. If you have an implementation that is only able to advertise its hub via host-meta, please comment below.

[sandhawke]

There's an argument in #101 that host-meta for rel=hub is useless unless we also allow host-meta for rel=self (with templates) or allow rel=self to be optional.

[aaronpk]

There has been some more discussion on the mailing list relevant to this topic, in support of dropping this feature.

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2017May/0003.html

[julien51]

I am still sad we cannot find a way to support all these static hosting platforms which do not let us alter headers conveniently (👀 at you Github!) and I worry that people (we?) will try to re-invent the wheel when inevitably some people wil try to achieve this...)

[aaronpk]

As discussed on the 2017-08-15 call, due to a lack of interest and implementations of the .host-meta method of endpoint discovery, the group resolved to drop the at-risk feature from the spec. https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-08-15-minutes#resolution04