- From: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:37:55 +0200
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>, public-declarative-apps@w3.org
That's the thing. Even if you had Creators as a Group, should they all automatically have access to each others created resources? I don't think so, they should only get access to resources they themselves have created. So there should really as many different groups as there are creators, but that doesn't make practical sense. Another use case is: if an agent had Append authorization and created a new resource, but then has no other authorizations (or had them taken away) -- should he/she/it still be be able to manage that resource? I think that goes beyond what can be expressed using ACL ontology and requires inference, as you suggest, and/or SPARQL. On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 30 March 2017 at 17:57, Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org> > wrote: >> >> Hey all, >> >> We are using the W3C ACL ontology [1] to describe agents and their >> authorizations. >> >> I don't think however it is possible to express a rule such as "the >> creators of resources have X mode access to their created resources", >> because it is resource-dependent and there is no way to define >> "creators" as a single group. >> >> Please correct me if I'm wrong and/or suggest solutions that you use >> for this case. >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl >> > > Does a list of creators exist somewhere in a Group, or do you require it to > be a kind of inference?
Received on Friday, 31 March 2017 16:38:29 UTC