Re: Access Control Note

On 4 Aug 2014, at 23:32, Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote:

> Henry:
> We decided to remove access control for attributes (parts of triples)
> We did not discuss removing access control for triples.
> We can discuss this if you wish.

I don't see how you can do access control on parts of triples at all.

The argument as I understand it is that one can only give access or not
at the HTTP layer to a resource. What state of the resource you show
is another topic: call it filtering. That could be an orthogonal spec.
It is best to keep things simple and distinct to arrive at a consensus.

Henry

> All the best, Ashok
> 
> On 8/4/2014 9:47 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
>> Looking at your changeset cdcd4e3b2b39dfd0bc1362cf3119c3819f6efe9b
>> 
>> You have still left the access control at the individual triples in
>> 
>> [[
>> control may operate at different granularities: RDF or other documents, named graphs or individual triples.
>> The operations are typically create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) but other operations can easily be accomodated by
>> this design.
>> ]]
>> 
>> I tend to agree with Sandro that this is another technology, which we could call
>> filtering technology. It resembles access control, but is a lot more complex. So
>> it is better to leave it out to start with, and put another proposal forward for it.
>> 
>> 
>> Henry
>> 
>> On 31 Jul 2014, at 16:41, Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Henry:
>>> Please take a look at the latest Access Control draft on Mercurial.
>>> I removed wording about fine-grained access control.
>>> Sandro recommended removing the definition of ACG Resource.
>>> What do you think?
>>> 
>>> If you could read the entire note that would be great!
>>> -- 
>>> All the best, Ashok
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
>> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/

Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2014 09:02:36 UTC