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

Re: hashlinks vs trusty URIs

From: Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <snorre@diwala.io>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:40:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CAE8zwO0WGxqoVK18R5AhgDaB-DcovhqkL7-RnY9tTkh8GnX=BA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Kim Hamilton Duffy <kimhd@mit.edu>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 6 June 2020 12:41:17 UTC