Re: neither FCNS nor FOAFSSL can read a new foaf card (hosted in Azure). RDFa validators at W3C and RDFachecker say its fine...

On 27 Dec 2011, at 23:14, Peter Williams wrote:

> 
> Ive reached screaming point, despite it sort of working: See http://tinyurl.com/7zjf77v

You should relax and do some philosophy reading or something. That's what I am doing. I'll get
back to look at what issues may be causing your problems when my head has cleared a bit.

Some problems that I need to look at:

 1. Caching (need to improve that)
 2. Parsing of rdfa - my parser may not be that good
 3. Better reporting of errors

I know that I need to do some work in all those areas. Once those are done it should be a lot 
easier to solve your problem. Mhh. Perhaps one thing would be useful would be to add a transform
service for different formats, so that we can see how my parser parses your content...

Anyway, give me a bit of time to relax.

Henry

> 
> 
> 
> It only works in what I assume are "advanced validators" - those able to deal with proxying. Which is not to say that the advanced validators can use my own data source (and validated against it). But, assuming Kingsleys system SOMEHOW cleans up my data source (and turns it into a linked data set), putting the proxy URI in the SAN alongside the URI does make something work, in some places, sometimes.
> 
> 
> 
> I think I learned something, about where webid will get too. ANd, now, I can at least SEE/CONTEMPLATE the full power of the linke data model (as it relates to just webid, never mind the rest). Its rather BETTER than the X.500 subobject/instancing model, particularly if such as Henrys validator can cast its query to suit the linked data view (of my data source).
> 
> 
> 
> What this means for security I dont know; as the traditional notions of authority have gone out of the window.
> 
> 
> 
>  		 	   		  

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/

Received on Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:19:53 UTC