W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > November 2012

Re: What is a WebID?

From: Jürgen Jakobitsch <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 13:53:54 +0100
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-webid@w3.org" <public-webid@w3.org>, "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1352033634.4901.20.camel@linux-1rgw.site>
hi melvin, just a quick important reply (gotta leave and will replay in
more detail about the web2.0 thought)

i do NOT have anything against hash-uris, i have something against the
prescription of hash-uris. if you like them use them, if you like
non-hash uris use these.

if you like urn-s use urn-s. 
note : webIDRealm (the tomcat thing) is capable of retrieving the foaf
profile along with the publicKey not only via http, but also via an
underlying sail repository in case the profiles should not be publicly
available, so even cia and nsa agents can use it ;-)

wkr turnguard

On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 13:29 +0100, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4 November 2012 12:47, Jürgen Jakobitsch
> <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at> wrote:
>         hi melvin,
>         
>         for me the problem is that we now have a political dimension
>         of personal
>         preferences which cut my personal freedom of choice.
>         
>         if we award other linked data groups the same behaviour
>         (express
>         preferences of uri or serialization) the argument about the
>         advantages
>         of having one kind of uri and one kind of serialization become
>         void.
>         
>         linked data works with any kind of dereferenceable uri and any
>         kind of
>         serialization.
>         if webID only works with hash-http-uris and turtle it is just
>         another
>         application in the spirit of web2.0 in the special disguise of
>         using
>         linked data techniques.
> 
> I really do sympathize with the points you made and I was initially
> taken aback by this.  But having thought about it, I've warmed to the
> idea.  LDP is on a REC track and is possibly the group most relevant
> to our work.  If we can avoid duplication of effort that would be a
> plus, imho. 
> 
> 
> I really dont think anything has changed.  Give yourself a
> dereferencable URI and you're "on the web".  
> 
> WebID itself is just a name, and it will hopefully have a URI soon of
> the form urn:rfc pointing to a spec.
> 
> So the spec started mandating FOAF then it mandated an Agent, now it
> mandates turtle.  Things change, and may change again before 2014 when
> LDP becomes a REC.
> 
> Is there really a problem with hash URIs?  Redirects are a pain to
> program.  Ontowiki did object to this but after some thought worked
> out their architecture may even be better without the redirects.
> 
> In what way do you think this is in the spirit of web 2.0?  It is
> using a complete generalized and universal platform to solve a
> specific case in a way that will be interoperable and follow
> standards.
>  
>         
>         wkr turnguard
>         
>         On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 04:06 +0100, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>         >
>         >
>         > On 3 November 2012 22:40, Jürgen Jakobitsch
>         > <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at> wrote:
>         >         hi,
>         >
>         >         i just read the whole discussion that led to this
>         "definition"
>         >         of a
>         >         webID. if i wouldn't have missed it, i would have
>         opposed it
>         >         with a
>         >         "minus a zillion".
>         >
>         >         "A WebID is a hash HTTP URI which denotes an Agent.
>         You can
>         >         GET an RDF
>         >         model as TURTLE"
>         >
>         >         linked data is all about borderless data io and
>         putting such
>         >         things into
>         >         a spec is the first brick in the wall (when thinking
>         >         consequent and
>         >         algorithmic)
>         >
>         > the URI is borderless data in that it is a reference of
>         universal
>         > power
>         >
>         > other systems are a specific form
>         >
>         >
>         >         what if the payment wg (fictional) says : a
>         transactionID  is
>         >         a non-hash
>         >         uri, you can get an rdf model as rdf+xml
>         >
>         > so what?
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         and the next group does the same with another form
>         of uri and
>         >         another
>         >         serialization...
>         >
>         > it is consistent but maybe not universal
>         >
>         >
>         >         what about all other forms of uris (non-hash,
>         mailto:,
>         >         urn:uuid)...
>         >         think about your fridge logging into the next
>         supermarket and
>         >         shop for
>         >         you, it will most probably have a unique identifier
>         (uuid).
>         >
>         > it's a uri that's fine
>         >
>         >
>         >         think about your home alarm device that needs to
>         authenticate
>         >         to call
>         >         the police or send notification, will it have a hash
>         http uri?
>         >
>         > sure
>         >
>         >
>         >         what about the public key? if this makes it to the
>         spec do i
>         >         have to
>         >         conclude that every hash-http-uri (with rdf:type
>         foaf:Agent)
>         >         is a webID?
>         >         does a webID need a public key?
>         >
>         > henry wanted this but we decoupled auth from identity, so no
>         >
>         > it's just naming
>         >
>         >
>         >         it is sad to say, but if this definition makes it to
>         spec i do
>         >         not have
>         >         a valid webID anymore and i'm certainly not going to
>         change my
>         >         webID
>         >         (with which i have signed a million mails) to a
>         hash-uri.
>         >         furthermore my
>         >         promotion for webID will stop immediately until the
>         community
>         >         comes to
>         >         terms with kant's categorical imperative
>         >
>         > so hard to add # to the end of your webid?  is there a
>         problem that?
>         >
>         >
>         >         "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can,
>         at the same
>         >         time,
>         >         will that it should become a universal law." [1]
>         (know the
>         >         difference
>         >         between interface and impl)
>         >
>         >         wkr http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>         >
>         >
>         >         [1]
>         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative
>         >
>         >         --
>         >         | Jürgen Jakobitsch,
>         >         | Software Developer
>         >         | Semantic Web Company GmbH
>         >         | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
>         >         | A - 1070 Wien, Austria
>         >         | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22
>         >
>         >         COMPANY INFORMATION
>         >         | web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
>         >         | foaf      :
>         >
>         http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
>         >         PERSONAL INFORMATION
>         >         | web       : http://www.turnguard.com
>         >         | foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>         >         | g+        :
>         >         https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
>         >         | skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
>         >         | xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"
>         >
>         >
>         
>         --
>         | Jürgen Jakobitsch,
>         | Software Developer
>         | Semantic Web Company GmbH
>         | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
>         | A - 1070 Wien, Austria
>         | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22
>         
>         COMPANY INFORMATION
>         | web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
>         | foaf      :
>         http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
>         PERSONAL INFORMATION
>         | web       : http://www.turnguard.com
>         | foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>         | g+        :
>         https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
>         | skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
>         | xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"
>         
> 

-- 
| Jürgen Jakobitsch, 
| Software Developer
| Semantic Web Company GmbH
| Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
| A - 1070 Wien, Austria
| Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22

COMPANY INFORMATION
| web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
| foaf      : http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
PERSONAL INFORMATION
| web       : http://www.turnguard.com
| foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
| g+        : https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
| skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
| xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"

Received on Sunday, 4 November 2012 12:54:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 4 November 2012 12:54:27 GMT