W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > December 2011

Re: Important Question re. WebID Verifiers & Linked Data

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:31:16 -0500
Message-ID: <4EF36964.6060109@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 12/22/11 12:10 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> On 22 Dec 2011, at 17:55, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>> On 12/22/11 11:32 AM, Jiří Procházka wrote:
>>> let the WebID core specification
>>> be abstract, based on Linked Data ideal, not requiring specific format,
>>> then have a separate specification aimed at interoperability and
>>> adoption, specifying restrictions such as
>> If you are suggesting the above, then I am in violent agreement with you!
> Yes, we had that this summer and nobody on this list did anything then. Jiri do you have
> a WebID implementation of any kind?
>
>> There's no harm in having complimentary implementation guides for RDF/XML, RDFa, Microdata, Turtle.
>>
>> TimBL's design issues note (*original version*) for Linked Data is a classic example of an implementation guide for publishing Linked Data at InterWeb scales, courtesy of AWWW exploitation :-)
>>
>> Henry: RDF and SPARQL specificity was added retrospectively.
> You mean RDF/XML specificity. People here seemed to be quite happy with it
> SPARQL is not required. Look at the text it has 2 paragraphs on how you can do the same without SPARQL.
>
> Just a few moments ago you were saying how turtle is great because it has sparql which is like turtle.

And you clearly just don't understand where I am coming from.
Just  because I am not selfish about RDF/XML you think I have something 
against it. Do you have any idea how much RDF/XML we exploit in our 
products? Do you have any idea how much SPARQL we exploit? Non of that 
matters re. the fundamental points I am trying to make with regards to a 
spec that has the Web as its target.

Perform the following against the resource returned to you when you 
de-reference the URI: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Linked_Data :

1. look at the footer
2. view source
3. run it through a URI debugger or cURL.

That's SPARQL driving Linked Data in the most dynamic way.

Again, this is about the sanctity of abstraction. Linked Data is based 
on AWWW. AWWW is great abstraction devoid of leakage. WebID is either 
compliant with Linked Data principles and the sanctity of AWWW of it isn't.

Please make up your mind.
>
>
> Henry
>
>> Links:
>>
>> 1. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html -- TimBL's Linked Data Design Issues Note.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen	
>> Founder&   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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder&  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 Thursday, 22 December 2011 17:31:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 December 2011 17:31:40 GMT