Re: HTTPS for RDF URIs?

On 1/30/14 5:10 PM, Alfredo Serafini wrote:
> uhm, I have a question about the scheme differences.
> This could be used maybe to expose the "same" resource projecting only 
> public values (http) and value accessible to specific user on secure 
> connection?

Yes!

Basically, I use the very pattern you outline above to control access to 
some of the SPARQL endpoints I maintain i.e., only certain identities 
are allowed to perform specific operations e.g., using the sponger 
instance to crawl as part of follow-your-nose exploration that includes 
RDF transformation etc..

Simple example I am the only one that can apply new data to my glossary 
to terms doc [1], everyone else can read. In other cases, I assign 
privileges to identities that are associated with a group or the result 
of SPARQL ASK evaluations etc.. All of that happens as part of ACL 
configuration and (in my case) mapping making the coreference a part of 
my configuration setup as opposed to doing it via owl:sameAs relations.

> (https)
> I mean: apart from the fact that we could have different formats, do 
> you think that a use case would actually be in exposing also data with 
> limited public access?

That's what I do :-)

[1] http://bit.ly/1hFRCxh -- Glossary of Terms Doc (I am the only one 
that can update that)
[2] 
https://kingsley.idehen.net/about/html/www.adweek.com/news/technology/wow-hack-shows-twitter-handles-are-worth-big-bucks-155343 
-- You will get an empty page (unless some identity associated with the 
group that I allow to sponge get there before you).


Kingsley
>
> Alfredo
>
>
> 2014-01-30 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com 
> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>>:
>
>     On 1/30/14 1:09 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>
>>         If not bad, is there any provision for allowing that an HTTPS
>>         URI that only differs in the scheme part from HTTPS URI be
>>         identified as the same resource?
>>
>>
>>     http and https are fundamentally different resources, but you can
>>     link them together with owl : sameAs, I think ...
>
>     Yes.
>
>     You simply use an <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs>
>     <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs> relation to indicate that a
>     common entity is denoted [1] by the http: and https: scheme URIs
>     in question.
>
>     [1] http://bit.ly/1fqJ5yv -- Denotes Relation
>     [2] http://bit.ly/Lf4TSg -- Referent
>     [3] http://bit.ly/1bD2eZs -- Identifier.
>
>     -- 
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Kingsley Idehen 
>     Founder & CEO
>     OpenLink Software
>     Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
>     Personal Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen  <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>     Twitter Profile:https://twitter.com/kidehen
>     Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
>     LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen