- From: Martynas Jusevicius <martynas@graphity.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:25:40 +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>
Andrei, I would be interested. I have worked on ACL a lot recently, with a goal to produce a transparent JAX-RS authorization filter for our Graphity platform: http://graphity.org. I have successfully implemented the filter using W3C ACL ontology and plain SPARQL 1.1, but the code is unfortunately closed-source so far. Single SPARQL query checks access for a specific foaf:Agent instance (or foaf:Agent class in case of public access) and uses federation if necessary. The main issues I've encountered were mostly related to distributing ACL data across repositories and/or named graphs and attaching them to user accounts. Martynas graphityhq.com On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:05 PM, 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?). > > 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 19:26:09 UTC