- From: Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <snorre@diwala.io>
- Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:40:56 +0200
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Kim Hamilton Duffy <kimhd@mit.edu>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAE8zwO0WGxqoVK18R5AhgDaB-DcovhqkL7-RnY9tTkh8GnX=BA@mail.gmail.com>
Cant we just make trusty hashlink sandwich 🤔😂 ᐧ On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 9:30 AM Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > I must admit I did not know about the trusty URIs. Looking at it strictly > from the RDF point of view I wonder whether it is a good idea to transform > an RDF dataset by modifying the URI-s the way it is done in the example > (unless I misunderstand something). Instead, I would think having a > separate vocabulary to make statements like > > <graph URI> <:hasHash> "hash value" . > > etc. seems to be a cleaner approach to me, although it may be a matter of > taste. Of course, a clear vocabulary must be defined to describe this (and > signatures and other things), akin to what the XML Signature spec does. > > I guess this is in line with what Manu & al are exploring and which may (I > repeat: may!) become subject of a separate standardization effort @W3C at > some point… > > If that approach is favoured then, indeed, I do not see a major difference > between hashlinks and trusty URIs... > > Cheers > > Ivan > > On 6 Jun 2020, at 04:51, Kim Hamilton Duffy <kimhd@mit.edu> wrote: > > 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 > > > > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +33 6 52 46 00 43 > ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > -- *Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin* Co-Founder & CTO, Diwala +47 411 611 94 www.diwala.io
Received on Saturday, 6 June 2020 12:41:16 UTC