No, because not every site yet supports HTTPS and there is no time in the
future I see such a thing happening because of the high price of SSL/TLS
Certs, my website doesn't have a signed HTTPS cert because I don't have
$150 to spend on it (unless someone wants to pony up, in which case I would
dig it), similar to the discussion of CODE4LIB.ORG (which has yet to be
resolved) moving to HTTPS. In short there are many more websites on HTTP
then there are on HTTPS (and we are talking millions more)  and until the
Administrative cost goes away (not for a long time!) not everyone will be
able to move to HTTPS and to ensure interoperablity we can't make https the
default!

*Riley Childs*
*Library Technology Manager at Charlotte United Christian Academy
<http://cucawarriors.com/>*
*Head Programmer/Manager at Open Library Management Projec
<http://openlibman.sf.net/>t <http://openlibman.sourceforge.net/>*
*Cisco Certified Entry Level Technician *
_________________________

*Phone: +1 (704) 497-2086*
*email: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>*
*email: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>*
*Twitter: @RowdyChildren <http://twitter.com/rowdychildren>*




On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Simeon Warner <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Connecting two recent c4l threads... It seems that the web is rapidly
> moving toward https. I'm tempted to wonder how soon it will be before https
> is the default protocol when you type a bare domain name into your browser?
> [1] With linked data we want cool URIs, where one element of coolness is
> persistence. If it is likely that http URIs will be seen to be "unclean"
> [2] in the near future that would surely be a pressure to change them.
> Should we just go ahead and always use https URIs for linked data now?
>
> Cheers,
> Simeon
>
> [1] Of course you can do this yourself much of time with HTTPS Everywhere <
> https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere> but I really mean when is it so
> much the norm that chrome/firefox/safari/etc. do that expansion out of the
> box, instead of assuming http.
>
> [2] Perhaps snoopability of http traffic doesn't matter in the bulk
> harvest case but in the case of an individual following a link, any use of
> an http URI could leak significant info about what is being looked at even
> the server immediately redirects to an ssl page.
>