- From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:32:53 +0000
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3FN0JvVe8C9cUq_7ehY5_tigfDPdo3Wzx_zu5rROMPnQ@mail.gmail.com>
i like the term actor. the idea being that a bot may be an agent of an actor who is responsible for the actions of the bot. human centered design kinda stuff. organic life is responsible for the invented stuff, via various means. On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 6:15 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > On 25 January 2016 at 01:55, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> > wrote: > >> On 1/24/16 2:54 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> I wanted to highlight this issue raised by Sandro Hawke relating to >> >> https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl >> >> "Servers are required to recognize the class *foaf:Agent* as the class >> of all agents. This indicates that the given access is public. In some >> cases this will mean that authentication is therefore not required, and may >> be skipped. When a resource is being written, however, it may be necessary >> to associate the change with some kind of ID for accountability purposes." >> >> Here is the issue: >> >> https://github.com/solid/solid/issues/35 >> >> I think proposal is to change this to rdf : Resource to be more general. >> >> Any thoughts on this? >> >> >> I don't believe ACLs are foaf:Agent specific. When I make an >> acl:authorization instance, the object of its acl:agent_class relation >> doesn't have to be a foaf:Agent. >> >> [1] http://www.openlinksw.com/c/9NVXKWB -- acl:agent_class relation >> description. >> > > Right. > > But as LDP is a webization of the UNIX file system. > > WebAccessControl is roughly a webization of UNIX permissions. > > In UNIX permissions you have the concepts: > > User > Group > Everyone > > We have a webiziation of User namely WebID, a URI that denotes an Agent > (not necessarily FOAF, but that is the hint). > > Perhaps it's possible to specify everyone and group more clearly? > > Everyone -- An Agent? A FOAF Agent? anyURI? > Group -- A FOAF Group or something else? > > As a server, how do we check membership in a group, I think is the > question? > > >> -- >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen >> Founder & CEO >> OpenLink Software >> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >> Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com >> Personal Weblog 2: 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 >> Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this >> >>
Received on Monday, 25 January 2016 08:33:34 UTC