Re: A Quick Note on WebID history - Re: All the Agents Challenge (ATAC) at ISWC 2021

On Jul 26, 2021, at 02:34 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Ah, I see the issue here
> 
> The current WebID spec is in fact tightly coupled to Turtle (and http) via "MUST"
> 
> https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/ <https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/>
Those who fail to read the "Status of This Document" are
doomed to pain and agony all the days of their implementation.

To wit:

> This document is produced from work by the W3C WebID Community Group <http://www.w3.org/community/webid/>. This is an internal draft document and may not even end up being officially published. It may also be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress. The source code for this document is available at the following URI: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID>
> This document was published by the WebID CG <http://www.w3.org/community/webid/> as an Editor's Draft. If you wish to make comments regarding this document, please send them to public-webid@w3.org <mailto:public-webid@w3.org> (subscribe <mailto:public-webid-request@w3.org?subject=subscribe>, archives <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/>). All comments are welcome.
> 
> Publication as an Editor's Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
> 
In other words: This is not a spec, current or otherwise.

It is very much an Editor's Draft, coming from the discussions
of what was then an Incubator Group, and transformed into a
Community Group, but really reflecting the opinions of the
Chair who was doing double-duty as Editor, much more than of 
the group as a whole.

It does not come close to reflecting consensus of that old XG 
(of which I was a member), never mind transition to a Candidate 
Recommendation, and further progress down the REC-track was 
likewise years away, as there was never a WebID Working Group.

In my opinion, it should never have received the Respec skin 
it has, which makes it *look* like something it isn't, and
at a minimum, W3C should find a way to put the watermarks
now in common use on draft specs in the github.io space onto
all the old draft specs that will otherwise continue to draw
people into thinking that output of one person's keyboard
have the same weight as the work product of several if not
dozens of people intellectual and technical efforts.

Be seeing you,

Ted





--
A: Yes.                          http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html
| Q: Are you sure?           
| | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
| | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
Senior Support & Evangelism  //        mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
                             //              http://twitter.com/TallTed
OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http://www.openlinksw.com/
         20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803
     Weblog    -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/
     Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/
     LinkedIn  -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/
     Twitter   -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink
     Facebook  -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware
Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers