W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2004

RE: Spamming a URI

From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:39:10 -0700
Message-ID: <0E36FD96D96FCA4AA8E8F2D199320E5202FB3B3F@RED-MSG-43.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Matt Halstead" <matt.halstead@auckland.ac.nz>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

The semantic web is really no different than the regular WWW in this
respect.  We regard it as a virtue that *anyone* can publish a web page,
even if the web page contains lies.  We also regard it as a virtue that
anyone on the web can link to any other page, even if the owner of the
target page does not know or support the person doing the linking.

You assess trust by considering the source, checking for digital
signatures, etc.  One way to add assurances to RDF:
http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Matt Halstead
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 7:28 PM
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Spamming a URI
> 
> 
> I realize there is 'trust' in the semantic web cake[1], but I 
> am intrigued to understand how this is envisaged to work at 
> even a simple RDF level.  If we have something as simple and 
> useful as a semantic web crawler, e.g. swoogle [2], then how 
> do we ignore the work of spammers which inappropriately 
> attribute properties and values to, or reference in any way, 
> a particular resource URI?
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/0412-RDF-functions/slide4-0.html
> [2] http://pear.cs.umbc.edu/swoogle/index.php
> 
> cheers
> Matt
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2004 03:40:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:09 GMT