W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2020

hashlinks vs trusty URIs

From: Kim Hamilton Duffy <kimhd@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:51:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFmmOzfu1Ycp+Xcz+rUpC8kcC=UYAzVQVXHpOhdbeKV4ZJ1-Zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
I've started evaluating the difference between hashlinks
<https://w3c-ccg.github.io/hashlink/> (a CCG/IETF) work item and a similar
(but older) effort I recently ran across, referred to as "trusty URIs
<https://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.5775.pdf>" (Tobias Kuhn and Michel Dumontier).

The intent seems to be similar, they are both compatible with ni-URIs, but
there may be one compelling difference:

For trusty URIs, there are two modes: one for byte-level file content and
the other that operates on RDF graphs. The relevant text in the hashlinks
spec is a little ambiguous in that regard -- I imagine it may similarly
enable both modes, but I'm not sure.

As context, in the EDU space, there is very strong interest in use of
linked data
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pt-VNnjoYgl23Mlu0Tjyax5RgANPBfDijERz0SNYfSo/edit#heading=h.2fde5vhrnfjo>,
and I think we are more likely to be interested in operations on RDF
graphs, so this isn't just a pedantic exercise. :)
<https://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.5775.pdf>

Interested in any additional context.
Thanks,
Kim


-- 
*Kim Hamilton Duffy*

Senior Technology Architect

*MIT Open Learning | Digital Credentials Consortium*

kimhd@mit.edu
Received on Saturday, 6 June 2020 02:52:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 6 June 2020 02:52:17 UTC