W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > April 2021

Re: Temporal Stack

From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 02:08:44 +1000
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3K8i2kSu1+dcELBbw=y4ayyd8-qpkjLvza18e7zGft-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
Cc: public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
FWIW; i think there's a fairly substantial process, may take some time, to
consider the various use-cases...

An example could be, the ability for persons to make an attack (ie: via
gitter, linkedin, facebook, etc.) then change the post / wording, to make
the responder look like an attacker.  so, reality distortion; is the
overall point...

another may be, that a 'credential' or some sort of signed linked-data
instrument says one thing when its issued, but later on, the underlying
resources are changed as to result in a circumstance where the issued
statement (that is temporal by nature) says something else entirely, later

the major attack vectors are thought to be against 'good actors' not
professional organised crime experts (or 'opportunists' or whatever persons
in non-criminal organisations are termed).  therein also; i'm mindful of
false statements by police, whereby existing data collected online in a
temporally significant manner (ie: during or prior) says clearly something
other than the statement made by a governmental / public service,

On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 02:03, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>

> AFAIK: it doesn't work so well for CMS generated HTML...
> Do you have an alternative?
> How could a methodology be produced, both at the CMS level and perhaps
> also at a DLT (DHT, etc.) level?  IMO, it would require a URI structure?
> DIDs were intended to support it, but it appears they've got a different
> path..  maybe not? regardless, its a 'shared responsibility', which some
> may be happy to pay to ensure, its provided...
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 01:41, Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Isn't this HTTP E-Tag header purpose? (Versioning / Cache handling)
>> And "If-modified-since" header could also come of use, if we talk about
>> state (representation) of the same HATEOAS (REST) entity preserving its
>> identifier (the immutable part in a domain).
>> Also, a previous post in the public-webapps and other lists: "A less
>> ephemeral web" states things that could benefit onto what you propose.
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2021, 9:37 AM Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> had a think.  thought i'd post it.
>>> IMO there's cause to build into WWW / HTTP a method to support temporal
>>> lookups, other than simply using archive.org.   i imagine this would
>>> eventually require ICANN, IETF (etc) support; amongst other implications.
>>> The functional outcome would be an ability to look up a page at a
>>> particular date.   This may involve differences in who owned the domain
>>> name at that time (vs. who may own it later on), amongst many other
>>> implications.  There would have to be a 'format' of 'standards' around how
>>> to achieve it, for long-term support.
>>> Foundational requirements, prior to more easily engaging CMS providers
>>> such as Wordpress / automattic, drupal, etc.  would be to define a simple
>>> concept that could be built upon to do it.  I imagine it may take some
>>> years to do, and i'm not entirely sure i'm up for it - historically no
>>> funding for work by civics persons (civilians, working independent of
>>> contract / employment revenue) for doing W3C works; maybe, with new changes
>>> that might be reviewed; but regardless,
>>> cost of storage, etc. has been dropping.  I'm not sure what the economic
>>> model for it would be, but i can think of a variety of ways a solution that
>>> attends to the economic implications could be forged.  I also think, an
>>> evaluation may lead to an outcome where it's able to be understood how to
>>> do it at a lower energy cost than simply employing DHTs / Blockchains
>>> ("DLTs"), although the file-system layer may be considered independently,
>>> atm, idk; and don't really want to make the point any more complicated than
>>> it needs to be for now.
>>> Timothy Holborn
Received on Friday, 16 April 2021 16:09:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 16 April 2021 16:09:35 UTC