Re: HTTPS for RDF URIs?

this is truly simple and yet powerful... my only concern is about how
simple is to mantain that?




2014-01-30 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>:

>  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>:
>
>>  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
>> 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
>
>
>
>