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

Re: transfer of URI/WebID ownership

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:56:14 -0400
Message-ID: <5075706E.8030100@openlinksw.com>
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 10/10/12 7:51 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2012, at 13:34, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/10/12 5:12 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>>> But I think the question is here: is a 301 also a signal of a change of WebID, since
>>> the document has moved permanently, do #uris in the old document also need to be
>>> moved permanently?
>>>
>>> Henry
>> Should it matter how routing occurs if the end result is a WebID and public key association that mirrors what's in the X.509 certificate?
> That would be the simple answer - and that is I suppose the current position.
>
> But I am wondering about this, because when you have a 301 redirect the  resulting document relative URLs get interpreted according to the redirected to URL.

Yes.

>
> See Tim Berners Lee's point here:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2012Apr/0006.html
>
> So what happens then to #uris. After all they are also relative, right?

Yes.

> But now the question is
> the other way around if you do a #uri on a moved document do you have a #uri on the moved document? Do you query the one or the other?

Linked Data URIs simply denote entities. In the case of the WebID 
protocol, these entities are of type: foaf:Agent. All you ever do is 
de-reference the URI in the certificates SAN. Everything else is HTTP 
message exchange that's in effect routing. As you know, a hash URI 
simply delivers implicit rather than explicit indirection within the 
context of the Linked Data meme.


>
> I don't think this is well settled. ( But I'd be happy if we had real RFCs to point to if it has been settled ).

To me its is settled, what's sometimes unclear is the fact that Linked 
Data is about name based *indirection* via de-referencable URIs. 
Basically, a Linked Data URI is a Data Source Name (a denotation) that 
uses *indirection* to resolve to a Data Source/Location/Address.

>
> In any case the issue in this thread was "transfer of WebID ownership". Does a 301 indicate an intent to move the WebID, just as it indicates a permanently moved resource?
>
> I don't know.

It may or may not. A WebID verification engine can only make the final 
determination from the result of the WebID and Public Key association 
lookup. Basically, do the claims (WebID and Public Key relationship) in 
the X.509 certificate mirror those in the eventual profile graph 
(structured data bearing relationship mirror), following WebID  
de-reference.

We have to keep WebID in the realm of entity relationship semantics 
rather that HTTP message exchange mechanics.

Kingsley

>
> Henry
>
>> -- 
>>
>> 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 Wednesday, 10 October 2012 12:56:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:31 UTC