- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:09:41 +0200
- To: Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>, "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>, Linked Data Platform Working Group <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhKFwMXBjsRwJw9bvo7QNDFMGFevShVd6JeCEv2s6L9R1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 17 October 2013 15:05, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > For those of you who know me, please skip this paragraph. For the others, > I would first like to introduce myself. My name is Andrei Sambra and for > the past three years I have been involved in different W3C groups, such as > WebID, LDP and RWW (co-chair). As an advocate of Semantic Web technologies, > especially those taking user privacy into consideration, I am currently > working on two projects, MyProfile [1] (WebID provider / social network) > and RWW.IO [2], the later including support for WebID, LDP and WAC [3]. > RWW.IO is a Read/Write Web-based personal data store. > > Over the past few years, we have noticed that Linked Data is no longer a > technology limited to the public space, finding its way into consumer > applications. As a consequence, it becomes increasingly important to be > able to protect access to private/sensitive resources. To this regard, the Web > Access Control (WAC) ontology [3] has been put together by Tim Berners-Lee, > offering the basic means to set up ACLs. Due to its nature (i.e. an > ontology) however, it does not provide the formalism necessary to implement > it in order to achieve interoperability, nor does it provide an organized > space where it can be discussed and improved. > > The reason behind writing the email is that I would like to know how many > people are interested in participating to the standardization process of a > Web Access Control spec. > > The Read Write Web community group has so far been the host of inquiries > regarding the WAC ontology. However, being a community group, it does not > have access to W3C's teleconference system, nor to the issue tracking > system. Depending on your interest in a WAC spec, and the preliminary > discussions we might have, we may very well have to create a dedicated > working group. For now however, I suggest we use the public RWW list ( > public-rww@w3.org) in order to coordinate the efforts on this subject. > > Please let me know how you stand on this subject and perhaps suggest a way > to count who is interested in participating (doodle, something else maybe?). > I'd been interested in this topic for many years, and would love to help out. Actually each community group does have access to a W3C issue tracker: http://www.w3.org/community/rww/track/ Telcons I'm not sure about, tho. > > Best wishes, > Andrei > > [1] https://my-profile.eu/ > [2] https://rww.io/ > [3] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl >
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2013 13:10:15 UTC