W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2010

Re: [foaf-protocols] ACL

From: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:59:29 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTim2qRd_5VSpBTNSgpB7X7G8V23GtC9ko4b4j3Tn@mail.gmail.com>
To: nathan@webr3.org
Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, foaf-protocols <foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org>
<snip>
>  rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl";
...
> Even if a WAC link relation value was registered, it'd have to state to
> expect some form of RDF ACF in response else problems would arise, hence
> creation of the aforementioned^^ :)
</snip>

the registry exists to allow authors to make whatever claims they wish
about the nature of the response for the registered link relation
value.

using a 40+ byte URI instead of a 3 byte string makes no difference on
the expectations of the caller or the behavior of the responder. but
it makes a hell of a difference on the overall bandwidth and network
traffic.

mca
http://amundsen.com/blog/
http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me




On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 17:53, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
> Yup, that's what this is for
>
> Link: </.wac/everyone.n3>;
>  rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl";
>  title="Access Control File"
>
> as per
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10#section-4.2
>
> 'Applications that don't wish to register a relation type can use an
>   extension relation type, which is a URI'
>
> Even if a WAC link relation value was registered, it'd have to state to
> expect some form of RDF ACF in response else problems would arise, hence
> creation of the aforementioned^^ :)
>
> Best,
>
> Nathan
>
> mike amundsen wrote:
>>
>> rel=meta is insufficient.
>>
>> rel=http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl is better.
>>
>> better still would be a registered link relation value [1] (e.g. "WAC").
>>
>> [1]
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-10#section-6.2
>>
>> mca
>> http://amundsen.com/blog/
>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 17:41, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> ACL Ontology has been updated, thus we now have:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#accessControl
>>>  'The Access Control file for this information resource.
>>>   This may of course be a virtual resource implemented by the access
>>>   control system. Note also HTTP's header  Link:  foo.meta ;rel=meta
>>>   can be used for this.'
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Nathan
>>>
>>> Nathan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Story Henry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20 Apr 2010, at 08:47, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nathan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That sort of reminds me of something [1] ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I asked a round a bit [2] and the answer essentially was: go
>>>>>> register
>>>>>> one ... fancy doing it together?
>>>>>
>>>>> The latest document draft-nottingham is here btw
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://cidr-report.org/ietf/idref/draft-nottingham-http-link-header/
>>>>>
>>>>> One could just register it by adding the relation in the acl ontology
>>>>> such as
>>>>>
>>>>> acl:rules a rdf:Property;
>>>>>   rdf:domain foaf:Document;
>>>>>   rdf:range foaf:Document;
>>>>>   ...
>>>>>
>>>>> As you can see in the 5.5 examples, you can have a rel value as a URL.
>>>>> ( So in this it is similar to
>>>>> atom). The only disadvantage then is that you don't get the nice
>>>>> shorthand, for inclusion in Atom XML,
>>>>> and other documents.
>>>>
>>>> Yup that's what I went for too :)
>>>>
>>>> Link: </.wac/everyone.n3>; rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#";
>>>> title="Access Control File"
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foaf-protocols mailing list
>>> foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org
>>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Friday, 18 June 2010 22:00:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:27 UTC