W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > January 2012

Re: WebIDRealm RDFa

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 11:56:06 -0500
Message-ID: <4F05D626.5040203@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 1/5/12 11:07 AM, Peter Williams wrote:
>
> I find great utility in all three endpoint that act as a dumb 
> validator (FCNS, FOAFSSL, ODS). I've not found much utility in the 
> conformance test suite, to be honest. But, I think that is becuase 
> "its not for me". its for the folks doing the middleware, the data 
> service providers, etc.
>
>  I regularly use FCNS tester site (which spits out how it decoded the 
> cert for the required fields, which URIs it tried to match, and how it 
> succeeded). It then outputs its intputs (as base64 cert), and its 
> output (which matching values matches, from the graph and from the 
> cert). If it was in EARL, I would not use it. What it does is normal 
> and perfect. Its what I expect all my programmers to do, as a sanity 
> mode of operations.
>
> Henry servers an equivalent endpoint, that again is similar to what Id 
> expect an interceptor's logging output to be. I call it FOAFSSL, 
> and it contrasts with FCNS in behaviour. This is what makes it 
> interesting. If its output was in EARL, I would not use it.
>
> ODS has a very similar endpoint, except that it doesnt state its 
> workings (as do the other two). It just gives pass/fail. its not as 
> interesting, as it doesnt point out the flas in webid itself 
> (comparing and contrasting with FOAFSSL behaviour and FCNS behaviour, 
> for the very same inputs)

So we can add more diagnostic information. We tried the simple approach 
instead of the detail approach ( how we do things normally).

>
> The latest site from Jurgen is less good, since it mixes visual with 
> debug output. Ideally, i want NO visuals (and no drama).

The can be optional via URL patterns etc.

>
> The original test site from foaf.me still works, but may no longer 
> comply with the query's of today or the more recent vocab. I used it 
> the other day, and abandoned it.
>
> My own equivalent (that spits out lots of custom exceptions) is still 
> only available in intranet form (i.e. build the zip source). Attempt 
> to port it to 64 bit Azure failed, as its based on 32 bit libaries 
> produced a decade ago. marshallng between 32 bit and 64 bit world is 
> just beyond my time resources. I can hardly even read such code either 
> (being in old microsoft win32-era coding standards).
>
> Most of these tools look like they were built as spinoffs of an early 
> Henry idea (in which a webid validator turns into an IDP, and signs 
> its validation response using a signature in a URL.). Rather 
> than actually bother delivering such an endpoint (that allows a RP 
> site to ping such an IDP to get a signed copy of its final decision), 
> it allows me the browser user to see what the IDP does as it goes 
> through its state machine. Its a functional debug output, that is, 
> like a billion other software engineering projects.
>
> These made ideal system integration style endpoint, particular when 
> their behaviour differs. If there were spitting out earl, I would not 
> have used them (as I dont want to learn to speak EARL, not having yet 
> learned to speak webids evolving language). Dont make the clasical 
> error of requiring the technology you are  developing, to develop the 
> technology. It always fails. You compile windows souce on the last 
> version, not the version you are still compiling. (GNU may be 
> different, but then those guys are geniuses from a different planet to me)
>
> we should distinguish between
>
> (a) an interceptor-class implementations functional test output, 
> allowing for normal protocol debugging. One gets to see how the 
> engineer enforce the rquired behaviour through its state machine. 
> There should be N of these, of which Im responsible for 1 (on 
> windows). It has little nor nothing to do with semweb middleware. It 
> has everything to do with webid-specific use cases (that build on what 
> semweb is middleware is supposed to be able to do).
>
> (b) a conformance suite, of which there is 1 implementation only 
> (delivered by a gold-standard vendor, whoc "just groks it" and somehow 
> always expresses things "best".). Myopenid was that, in the openid 
> land, being the "most natural" expression, which sits nicely in its 
> intended place. Each product-grade interceptor of class (a) should go 
> to (b), during conformance test week. Ideally, one does this together, 
> so folks who know EARL can read it and interpret whats its 
> telling about the functional implementaiton (and how to get over some 
> subtle point that is impeding webid use case coverage).
>
> This is normal product engineering, based on standards.

Yes, exactly!

> Oned bothers with stnadards and not proprietary tech when one wants an 
> open market, usually becuase the tech is reaching commodity point (and 
> its value is dropping, as reserach from a decade ago has matured). The 
> commoditization extends the life of the core tech, giving it a new 
> lease  based on competitiion in value-adding (as folks compete). 
> Typically, lots of fun integration happens at that point, as folks 
> take things off the shelf, and stuff them together - for some widget 
> advantage.

Yes.

>
> In my work on an class (a) implementation, still on going as I attempt 
> full coverage of the core use cases, Ive managed to offload the semweb 
> parts to a sparql server, rather than doing an local query. this was 
> not as easy as I thought it would be. Though Kingsley solves the query 
> problem each and every time, any time I then alter any one element (to 
> extend the use case to fuller coverage), it just stops working. This 
> is a "me wall" (which may be telling, or not). So, Im going to now 
> follow up on the OTHER integration option ODS offers, in which I 
> simply present the cert blob to the ODS endpoint that does EVERYTHING. 
> Rather than issuing a quer,y I present an nputs and consume the 
> decision result. then I can get back to what I care about, which is 
> the webid use cases for authn and authz.

Yes, you want to be a plumber :-)

>
> Dont force everyone into being a middleware enginer.

Correct.

> And, dont make webid about making the middleware (that is then 
> required for webid).
>
It should be about plumbing.

Kingsley
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 21:43:09 -0500
> > From: kidehen@openlinksw.com
> > To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: WebIDRealm RDFa
> >
> > On 1/4/12 8:08 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> > > On 5 Jan 2012, at 01:45, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 1/4/12 7:42 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> > >>> On 5 Jan 2012, at 01:37, Henry Story wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 5 Jan 2012, at 01:27, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On 1/4/12 7:16 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 5 Jan 2012, at 01:09, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> But anyway, clearly you don't want to work on a common test 
> suite to help new people join.
> > >>>>>>> See my opening comments. It's been done before, many times 
> over with standards much more complex than WebID, used by masses of 
> people world wide.
> > >>>>>> Ok. So are you against a webid test suite then? Yes/No
> > >>>>> FWIW - No.
> > >>> Oops, that was probably meant as "No I am not against a test 
> suite" (the FWIW confused me)
> > >>>
> > >>> :-)
> > >> Yes, my parser works :-)
> > > Great. Now the next question is: are you prepared to help with the 
> project of building an open source test suite?
> > >
> > > What would you find a reasonable thing your end point can provide 
> so that test suites could hook onto it, and build up a report? I am 
> speaking about an end-point such as 
> http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html but others could be ok. 
> What can it produce that would be easy for a test suite to consume?
> >
> > Is there a test suite outline somewhere? Note, we've done similar with
> > SPARQL that included EARL reports. What's the equivalent for WebID?
> >
> > If there isn't an outline, just look at how its being done re. SPARQL.
> > Each vendor runs through a set of tests and products an EARL based 
> report.
> >
> > If you need more information from our verification service, please
> > specify, or point to an existing service that is providing required
> > information.
> >
> > Note: http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_check.vsp , the verification
> > proxy service which supports callbacks etc. I know Peter used this
> > successfully a while back.
> >
> > Kingsley
> > >
> > > Henry
> > >
> > >
> > >> Kingsley
> > >>> Good so then, how do you think we should go around to do that 
> simply?
> > >>>
> > >>> It's nearly 2am here, so I'll go to sleep.
> > >>>
> > >>> See you tomorrow.
> > >>>
> > >>> Henry
> > >>>
> > >>>> Why? What would be the problem with having an OpenSource set of 
> tests to help newcomers who produce new WebID Protocol endpoints to 
> run a bunch of tests against it to find out if they are WebID compliant?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Did we not in this thread use a whole bunch of tests 
> suites/validators? For RDFa, for RDF/XML etc....
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Were they not helpful?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It would help if you explained your position more clearly 
> because it could be that we have a misunderstanding between what you 
> think I am talking about and what I think I am talking about.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Henry
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Kingsley
> > >>>>>> If yes, how do you think we should proceed.
> > >>>>>> If no, why do you think we should not have one?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Perhaps WebID would be just too simple then....
> > >>>>>>> No comment :-)
> > >>>>>> 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
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Social Web Architect
> > >>>> http://bblfish.net/
> > >>>>
> > >>> 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
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >


-- 

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, 5 January 2012 16:57:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 5 January 2012 16:57:23 GMT