W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Social Semantic SPARQL Security for Access Control Vocabulary

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:22:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4EC2596A.8030803@openlinksw.com>
To: public-rww@w3.org
On 11/14/11 4:33 PM, Serena Villata wrote:
> Hi Kingsley, Bob,
> sorry for the broken link.
>
> On 9/21/2011 6:24 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 9/21/11 10:17 AM, Bob Ferris wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> here is another access control vocabulary with a special focus on the
>>> Social Web, see:
>>>
>>> - "Social Semantic Web Access Control" [1]
>>> - Social Semantic SPARQL Security for Access Control Vocabulary
>>> specification [2]
>
> Another reference to our work is "An Access Control Model for Linked Data" [3]
>
>
>>> 4. Overall the vocabulary looks a bit over-engineered and could be
>>> simplified here and there
>
> Version 0.2 of S4AC is on-line at http://ns.inria.fr/s4ac/
> In this new version, the vocabulary has been simplified a bit, and a different way of treating the
> contextual information has been proposed.
>
>
>>> 1. sioc:item relationships:
>>> - I do not really understand the rdfs:subClassOf sioc:Item relations
>>> for s4ac:Condition and s4ac:AccessPrivilege
> In version 0.2, the class s4ac:Condition has been removed, to simplify the model.
> However, s4ac:AccessPrivilege and s4ac:AccessCondition are still subclasses of sioc:Item.
> This is mainly to inherit properties, such as sioc:has_creator establishing a link to foaf:OnlineAccount :
> this can be useful to consider the relationships among the users as in social networks. Indeed, the name
> of the s4ac vocabulary itself is "Social Semantic [...]" thus it is linked to the social dimension modeled by sioc.
>
>>> 2. I like the idea of exceptions there a bit, see
>>> s4ac:hasPositiveException, s4ac:hasNegativeException, ...
>
> Negative and positive exceptions are then implemented as SPARQL 1.1 FILTER clauses.
> Thus, these two properties have been removed in version 0.2 to simplify the model.
> An example of this kind of exceptions is
>
> ASK { FILTER(! (?user=<http://MyExample.net#serena>))}
>
>
>>> [1] http://sdow.semanticweb.org/2011/pub/sdow2011_paper_5.pdf>>  [2] http://ns.inria.fr/s4ac>>
>>>
>> Getting 404 re: http://ns.inria.fr/s4ac/v1/s4ac.rdf :-(
>
> Further comments are welcome!
>
>
> Cheers,
> Serena
>
>
> [3] http://www.springerlink.com/content/5678q85482018453/
>
>
>
Serena,

Great stuff!

Wondering if you could add some rdfs:isDefinedBy relations to the ontology?

See: 
http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fns.inria.fr%2Fs4ac%2Fv2%23Read&urilookup=1

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen








Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 12:22:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 April 2012 12:56:01 GMT