W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > July 2010

Re: [foaf-protocols] Standardising the foaf+ssl protocol to launch the Social Web

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:14:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4C33564E.50401@openlinksw.com>
To: Bruno Harbulot <Bruno.Harbulot@manchester.ac.uk>
CC: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>, foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, Jeffrey Jaff <jeff@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
Bruno Harbulot wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'll start by a list of points that could be standardized (open questions).
>
> First, on the authentication part:
>
> 1. Standardizing the representation format: RDF/XML, RDFa, N3?
>
>    We do need a common format that representation consumers must be able
> to understand and that representation publishers must produce.
> We've had issues with the libraries we've used. I think it's fair to say
> that existing RDF libraries can generally accept RDF/XML more often or
> better than they accept RDFa or N3.
>   

Bruno,

Data representation has to be negotiable.

For sake of removing content negotiation requirement we should have 
defaults (or example/suggested representations) such as; HTML+RDFa, 
N3/Turtle, and RDF/XML.

But we shouldn't bind the protocol to any of the above.


I Don't have issues or strong views re. the other items :-)

[SNIP]




Kingsley
>
>
> (Here, just a few brief answers.)
>
> On 06/07/2010 10:30, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
>   
>> To me, some of the interesting questions are:
>>
>> - Where do the use cases for the two protocols overlap?
>>     
>
>   The notion of global identifiers.
>
>   
>> - Where do the use cases *not* overlap?
>>     
>
>   - Attribute exchange was retrofitted into OpenID, whereas it was built
> into FOAF+SSL from the start, due to the RESTful/linked-data nature.
>   - FOAF+SSL makes use of public key cryptography, which we could use to
> enhance a number of security aspects of identity and trust management.
> In particular, we could have WebID consumers (the websites that would
> let you log on with a WebID) obtain the public key itself and use a
> higher level of assertion regarding to the person holding the private key.
>
>   
>> - What are the benefits of using one over the other in the cases
>> where they overlap?
>>     
>
>   - Obtaining information about a WebID can benefit from the ontologies
> and the uniform interface of the web (discovery by dereferencing).
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Bruno.
> _______________________________________________
> foaf-protocols mailing list
> foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
>
>   


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen 
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 16:14:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:31 GMT