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

towards trusting the semantic web RE: Spamming a URI

From: <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 20:54:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <33710.62.212.108.234.1095900869.squirrel@homer.w3.org>
To: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Josh wrote

> ...There are many types of
> assurance -- some people might trust something based on the source
> domain name, others might require a PGP signature, and so on.  The level
> of assurance you want depends on the nature of the data.  Also, you can
> imagine scenarios where the trust is much more transitive...


Yep. I think some people have been around this wheel a few times. I am
wondering if anyone has done a recent state of the art?

I wrote a very brief presentation exploring some steps people have taken -
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/talks/0822-eze but it is in spanish.
Roughly it looked at the idea that Annotea introduced some trust by having
password control over who posted annotations, and keeping information
about that, at EARL's notion that an assertion has to include who made it
and when (in the context of conformance assertions - Josh's example of
Microsoft commenting on an IBM product is exactly the use case) and at the
fact that provenance tracking is clearly something that is seen as a need
in any serious system designed for the open semantic web.

I know there is other stuff done within W3C. I know of the mindswap stuff
and Tom Croucher's interest there.

Chris Bizer maintains a nice list of annotated pointers to interesting
resources at http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/SWTSGuide/ and
there are various bits of stuff around proposing how trust can be handled,
or is handled.

I'm wondering if anyone this year has tried to collect that information
and turn it into a written "this is what people are doing or talking about
at the moment". And in an ideal world, has done some comparison of the
various benefits and trade-offs in the approaches and the implementations
(an approach might be great for managing the information, but if nobody
knows how to build an interface there is at the very least some more work
to be done).

cheers

Chaals
Received on Friday, 24 September 2004 07:32:20 GMT

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