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

Re: What is a WebID?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 13:10:47 -0500
Message-ID: <5096AFA7.8080304@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
On 11/3/12 2:21 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
> On 3 November 2012 19:14, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com 
> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 11/3/12 1:49 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On 31 October 2012 14:38, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com
>>     <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         All,
>>
>>         In the last 48 hours following TPAC, a definition of what a
>>         WebID has emerged. It reads as follows: "WebID" (hash HTTP
>>         URI which denotes an Agent. Where you can GET an RDF model as
>>         TURTLE.) .
>>
>>         I believe this definition is unnecessary inflexible albeit
>>         well intended.
>>
>>         Problem:
>>
>>         A URI is an opaque identifier.
>>
>>         A Linked Data URI is a de-referencable URI that denotes an
>>         entity in such a way that when de-referenced said URI
>>         resolves to a description document of its referent. Put
>>         differently, you have two routes to the same document content
>>         i.e., the first being the entity name (URI) and the other
>>         being the entity description document address (URI/URL).
>>         Ideally, the content of the document in question takes the
>>         form of RDF model based structured data represented (or
>>         expressed) using an entity relationship graph.
>>
>>         A WebID supposed to be a Linked Data URI.
>>
>>         HTTP, hash URIs, and even the RDF data model are specific
>>         implementation details. They are collectively cost-effective
>>         and useful, but none of that makes them mandatory items for
>>         specs relating to Linked Data, Web-scale identity
>>         verification, or Web-scale resource access control.
>>
>>         The architecture of the Web is deliberately abstract thereby
>>         enabling powerful loose coupling of data access protocols,
>>         data representation formats, and semantics.
>>
>>         Simple Example:
>>
>>         At this point in time, should this definition hold, the
>>         hashless ProxyURIs that we use to watermark X.509
>>         certificates for holders of LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, G+
>>         etc.. accounts are all rendered non conforming, just like that.
>>
>>         Conclusion:
>>
>>         I am officially lodging my opposition to this definition of a
>>         URI that serves as a WebID.
>>
>>
>>     Kingsley, I share you concerns.
>>
>>     It's important to note that this is primarily a branding issue
>>     rather than technical.
>
>     You don't use branding to diminish. It's supposed to enhance.
>
>     The effect of this so-called branding is negative.
>>
>>     We've changed brand before, namely from FOAF+SSL to WebID.
>
>     FOAF != compromising URI opacity (which is major degradation of
>     AWWW and its architectural dexterity) .
>
>
>>
>>     Personally, I find it hard to weigh the pros vs cons of this
>>     decision.  But I do think having an agreed consensus of what
>>     terms means (eg identity vs authentication protocol) is a plus.
>
>     Its a major minus.
>
>
>>
>>     I was also horrified to learn that I didnt have a webid anymore,
>>     but got it serving turtle via conneg within an hour, and as a
>>     direct result could log in to my profile again!
>
>     Turtle utility isn't in question. That doesn't mean WebIDs, Hash
>     URIs, and Turtle docs == savvy WebID branding. It simply isn't.
>
>     The game isn't about formats and syntax. It's about entity
>     relationship semantics and logic. Notations for expressing entity
>     relationship graphs and across-the-wire serialization formats
>     don't need to be distractions. Conflation has never worked as a
>     branding mechanism. Look at the history before you:
>
>     1. RDF - data model + notation + serialization formats conflation
>     2. SPARQL - query language + query dispatch and results retrieval
>     protocol + query results serialization formats
>     3. Linked Data - data representation and data access mechanism
>     that RDF community sees as RDF re-branding
>     4. and now WebID -- pattern to be repeated by this new repetition
>     of the broken branding DNA.
>
>     Appreciation and adoption of all the items above are stunted by
>     the confusing effects of conflation based branding.
>
>     HTML isn't why the WWW took off, that's a misconception. It took
>     off because a browser provided a mechanism for understanding
>     hypertext and documents, at internet scale. This all happened
>     because of the "view source" pattern where folks copied and pasted
>     the code behind these pages which lead to "instant gratification"
>     etc..
>
>     Forcing a format on folks in any guise is broken by way of
>     unnecessary distraction. This is about semantics, not syntax!
>
>
> I appreciate all the points above and grok the value of modularity and 
> universality as the key advantages of the web.
>
> At the end of the day, im personally interested in technology that 
> works, and have less of a strong opinion on what it is called.  The 
> tech hasnt changed, just a slightly different way of delivering the 
> message.

We denote things for a reason. Names matter.

At this point, the broken definition of WebID has rendered a majority of 
existing WebIDs non compliant. The logic behind this prescription is 
mind boggling. Look, this entire endeavor is about to hit a brick wall 
for no reason whatsoever.

You don't need to compromise URI opacity for anything or anyone. Period!

Kingsley
>
>
>
>     Kingsley
>>
>>
>>         -- 
>>
>>         Regards,
>>
>>         Kingsley Idehen
>>         Founder & CEO
>>         OpenLink Software
>>         Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>         Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>         <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>>         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  <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>     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 Sunday, 4 November 2012 18:11:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 4 November 2012 18:11:11 GMT