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

Re: long term webid of peter, contrary to rumour

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 23:17:04 +0100
Cc: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C856EA27-D7C7-44F1-9D33-FD281F59C0C8@bblfish.net>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>

On 13 Nov 2011, at 22:48, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

> On 11/13/11 3:53 PM, Henry Story wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 13 Nov 2011, at 21:31, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> 
>>> On 11/13/11 4:48 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 13 Nov 2011, at 01:52, Peter Williams wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> at yorkporc.wordpress.com ive hosted on the blog's front page the site's contact page (from wordpress.com). It has in HTML the kind of information normally shown in a foaf card. it has my long term webid, hosted on an opera unite endpoint. Its not a foaf card like others and neither is the endpoint (being only available when I am online). 
>>>> 
>>>> That's ok. As the spec points out ( http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/ ) all that is required for WebID is the publication of the public key at that endpoint with some RDF markup. (btw, we should perhaps add a link to the W3C how to                   on publishing multiple formats in a content negated format)
>>> 
>>> Is it about publication of a public key with RDF markup? Is that the narrative? If it is, then be up front about it as I am tired of cycling this RDF wagon re. the problem it introduces, unnecessarily. 
>>> 
>>> If this is an RDF only solution, say so, and stick to it. Then live with the consequences.
>> 
>> Is there an issue you have with the spec? If so please tell us. 
> 
> I have an issue with narratives the end up with RDF as being inextricable re. WebID and its verification protocol. That's what I have an issue with. If the spec toes that line, then I have a problem with the spec. If the spec is RDF specific then qualify the whole thing as RDF based WebID, nice and simple.

We have RDF/XML, Turtle, RDFa markup in html. Where is RDF/XML inextricably linked? We speak about the model, and we show the serialisations that are widely accepted.  

There has to be a way of telling in follow your nose like manner how to get the graph, which does not rely on things like: if the service is called Facebook, then do this, but if it is Twitter then do that, and if is some other site then do that.  

Or how do you think we should currently work with Peter William's profile? Should we perhaps add something to the spec that says if the URL is 

$ curl -i http://home.homepw2.operaunite.com/webserver/content/
HTTP/1.1 503 Service Unavailable
Content-type: text/html
Connection: close
Server: UniteProxy/0.2.5

<html><frameset cols="100%"><frame src="http://unite.opera.com/general/noservice/homepw2/home/" /></frameset></html>

then we should go to http://yorkporc.wordpress.com/ and read the public key there by searching for the "RSA Public Key" string
and then finding the key by guessing that that's probably a modulus because it looks like one?

And even if we were to find the public key there, we would find that the webid does not point to the right place but to a different document that is unavailable. But perhaps that's acceptable because the spec should say that if its Peter William's site we should have an exception.

Clearly you are not going to defend such a position. But currently I don't see how Peter Williams can claim that he even has a WebID, not in any meaningful way related to this group's work.

> 
>> 
>> Most implementations I know of now are working with RDF serialisations, so those are the ones we should be sticking by initially, as we did from the very start.
> 
> Again, what on earth does that mean? That there will be a narrative utterly laced with that bias? Again, there's nothing wrong with saying: this is RDF based WebID etc.. That's better that pretending it isn't be it via spec or narrative.

So what do you want the spec to say?

> 
>> Those serialisations are well documented and clearly specified. 
> So?
> 
> Kingsley
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I see that your WebID Profile Page - as it is called in the spec section 2.3 - is in html. So I guess it's meant to be parsed as RDFa.
>>>> The RDFa http://www.w3.org/2007/08/pyRdfa/ validation service seems to only return a few URLs for your page.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't see that you have specified any of the cert or rsa namespaces so if you want to turn that into a WebID you do need to follow the explanation here
>>>> 
>>>>   http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/#rdfa-html-notation
>>>> 
>>>> If you find problems or unclarities in any aspect of the spec, please explain which part of the text is unclear, and what wording you suggest would help improve it.
>>> 
>>> You are talking syntax again. Can WebID not be discussed conceptually without syntax specificity? Is this impossible? 
>> 
>> I am talking spec.
>> 
>> In the future when semantics is more clearly and widely understood then one will no longer need to mentions syntax. But at present that is not the case. The document is an evolving one.
>> 
>> Henry
>> 
>>> 
>>> Kingsley
>>>> 
>>>> Henry
>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> I happen to enforce more privacy than perhaps do most consumers (being a security type engineer who is experimenting with semantic web ideas, as they evolve). I know some folks want foaf cards as public data, cacheable by search engines and others maintaining huge triple stores. I dont. I want to assert my privacy expectations (becuase in the US, one has no rights until they are asserted - this being the way that social laws on privacy happen to be structured.) And I do this in ways that may not meet the idealized, academically-normalized semantic web concept, which assumes you have public documents that anyone can browse, cache, cite from, etc.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Now 
>>>>>  
>>>>> does anyone know HOW to make a wordpress contact page embed either
>>>>>  
>>>>> (1) an XML stream, coding up the xml-serializion of a foaf card (e.g. the output of foaf.me), or
>>>>> (2) the RDFa of a foaf card.
>>>>>  
>>>>> I cannot make either work.
>>>>>  
>>>>> I seem to remember that one was supposed to be able to add  "XML data island" as a subelement in HTML (since XHTML is just an XML vocab). One is supposed to be able to embed RDFa tags in HTML elements too. Unfortunately, the wordpress site strips out what I add (refusing to host them). Ill guess that these are default safety options, that can be removed by those who know how.
>>>>>  
>>>>> My wordpress blogsite is hosted by wordpress cloud service, not by me on a server (im not sufficient competent to run a production server). So, there may be less ability to change the configuration to offer RDFa and XML embedding, than a site one hosts on a private server. 
>>>> 
>>>> Social Web Architect
>>>> http://bblfish.net/
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 22:17:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 13 November 2011 22:17:41 GMT