W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Linked Data Platform Working Group Charter comment

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:27:33 +0000
Cc: <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com>, <public-ldp@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BC13ED3E-A9BB-4C00-94D7-3CE826319A10@deri.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

> One approach would be (something that is possible today thought was  
> not before) is to create a community group for that purpose, with  
> the explicit charter of consolidating/surveying what is out there in  
> this area already, and see if there is a possibility/chance to come  
> up with some more systematic standardization work. We would need  
> champions to drive that, though...


You mean like http://www.w3.org/community/rww/ maybe? :)

Cheers,
	Michael
--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html

On 17 Jan 2012, at 15:17, Ivan Herman wrote:

> One approach would be (something that is possible today thought was  
> not before) is to create a community group for that purpose, with  
> the explicit charter of consolidating/surveying what is out there in  
> this area already, and see if there is a possibility/chance to come  
> up with some more systematic standardization work. We would need  
> champions to drive that, though...
>
> Ivan
>
> On Jan 17, 2012, at 16:05 , <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com> wrote:
>
>> Ivan,
>>
>> Indeed. [Sigh] If I knew of an access control mechanism that is  
>> mature and
>> proven in the Linked Data context I would have made a much stronger
>> statement in favor of addressing the issue. We do not want to  
>> engage in
>> R&D work (we have made that mistake before ;-) but my great fear is  
>> that
>> if we merely suggest that someone else will take care of this we  
>> may be
>> signaling that this is not an issue of paramount importance.
>>
>> I don't have any magical answers or advice here, I am merely  
>> expressing
>> concern... I guess I would like there at least to be some  
>> discussion about
>> this. Saying that there is no solution and saying that something is  
>> out of
>> scope should, after all, not be the same thing.
>>
>> 	- Ora
>>
>>
>> On 2012-01-17 9:54 AM, "ext Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Ora,
>>>
>>> I hear you. However (and that may show my complete ignorance...)  
>>> is there
>>> any access control mechanism out there that has already proven  
>>> itself in
>>> the area of Linked Data deployment that is in the maturity level of
>>> standardization? I am a bit concerned about chartering this group  
>>> with an
>>> essentially R&D work while the other goals are much less so...
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>> On Jan 17, 2012, at 15:47 , <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As much as I would like to have a "tight scope" for this WG, I  
>>>> have to
>>>> observe that access control (or more like lack thereof) has often  
>>>> been a
>>>> problem in Semantic Web/Linked Data projects I have been involved  
>>>> in.
>>>> Particularly fine-grained access control of Semantic Web data.
>>>>
>>>> I fear that deeming access control strictly "out of scope" and  
>>>> hoping
>>>> that
>>>> some (so far unspecified) liaison with other groups to solve this
>>>> problem
>>>> will only result in the issue not being seen as important enough.
>>>>
>>>> My $0.02.
>>>>
>>>> 	- Ora
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Dr. Ora Lassila  ora.lassila@nokia.com  http://www.lassila.org
>>>> Principal Technologist, Nokia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2012-01-17 6:25 AM, "ext Michael Hausenblas"
>>>> <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd suggest to improve the following section and be more explicit
>>>>> regarding the bigger picture [1]:
>>>>>
>>>>> [[
>>>>> 2.3 Out of Scope
>>>>> Several possible standards that are out of scope for this group,  
>>>>> such
>>>>> as those listed below:
>>>>>
>>>>> 	 Access control mechanisms, WebACL, Web Identity
>>>>> ]]
>>>>>
>>>>> Mention that both authentication and authorisation are orthogonal
>>>>> issues and hence, in order to stay focused and to be successful,  
>>>>> the
>>>>> WG will not focus on these issues (but liaison with the respective
>>>>> groups to ensure compatibility and openness).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> 	Michael
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WriteWebOfData
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
>>>>> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
>>>>> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>>>>> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
>>>>> Ireland, Europe
>>>>> Tel. +353 91 495730
>>>>> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
>>>>> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 15:29:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 17 January 2012 15:29:16 GMT