- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:26:45 -0400
- To: public-rww@w3.org
- Message-ID: <f5d6184a-742d-9831-1c95-dad74426ee18@openlinksw.com>
On 10/28/21 2:37 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 19:15, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
> wrote:
>
> On 10/28/21 9:28 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 at 19:14, Kingsley Idehen
>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/27/21 6:42 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 at 01:59, Timothy Holborn
>>> <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 at 00:28, Melvin Carvalho
>>> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 06:30, Timothy Holborn
>>> <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Heya,
>>>
>>> Long time ago, work was being done mostly via
>>> RWW, that considered HTTPa & an array of other
>>> ecosystem considerations.
>>>
>>> Since then DID work has developed.
>>>
>>> There's an objection going on ATM.
>>>
>>>
>>> AFAIK, there's an objection from Mozilla / Tantek.
>>> Then again Tantek objected to Solid being part of
>>> the SWWG too. I get the impression that he really
>>> dislikes Linked Data, but I dont fully understand why
>>>
>>> See:
>>>
>>> https://www.evernym.com/blog/w3c-vision-of-decentralization/
>>>
>>> Not been following it closely, but I'm sure DID will
>>> get through the w3c process. Just politics at play
>>>
>>>
>>> Per the lists: Formal objections raised by Apple &
>>> Google also. (not sure about Tantek?)
>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/
>>> apparently
>>> https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/ethical-web-principles/
>>> related issues were raised. looks like that started to
>>> evolve around the time i mocked-up some of
>>> https://github.com/webcivics/ontologies whereby the
>>> delivery of
>>> https://github.com/WebCivics/ontologies/blob/master/humanrights.owl
>>> into production should probably live (imo) on DID:UN or
>>> similar.(sadly no one appears to have advanced these
>>> works, if i am mistaken - please let me know the link to
>>> the ontology online)
>>>
>>> Vaccine Passports seemingly started in California
>>> https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB2004&showamends=false
>>> <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB2004&showamends=false>
>>>
>>>
>>> and many are now built using this technology
>>>
>>> https://www.ibm.com/watson/health/resources/digital-health-pass-blockchain-explained/
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/presentations/travel-pass/
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/worlds-airports-and-leading-airlines-join-commontrust-network-and-begin-roll-out-of-commonpass-in-december-in-support-of-safer-border-reopening-301179752.html
>>>
>>> https://trustoverip.org/get-involved/good-health-pass-implementation/
>>>
>>> Microsoft (which often provides infrastructure for
>>> governments) is also deploying a version of it; but
>>> afaik, its using JSON not JSON-LD.
>>>
>>> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/verifiable-credentials/decentralized-identifier-overview
>>>
>>>
>>> SO, there may be a future DID:MSFT Web, that isn't
>>> interoperable with the broader web.
>>>
>>> There's widespread reports (and 'common knowledge') of
>>> persons being excluded from society based upon the
>>> status of their 'vaccine passport'.
>>>
>>> So, ‘the web’ (‘internet’) has become a mandatorily
>>> required appendage for socio-economic participation as
>>> is now consequential to the global commercialisation of
>>> ‘vaccine passports’. Digital Identity infrastructure is
>>> now increasingly vital for any human being who seeks to
>>> have agency.
>>>
>>> There are different meanings different groups use when
>>> they speak about ‘identity’ or ‘digital identity’.Some
>>> definitions seem to mean 'property'.
>>>
>>> having been granted some assistance to get a better look
>>> into the situation (with thanks); my considerations are
>>> that there's an ethics / sustainability - impact on
>>> humanity problem (not new).
>>>
>>> W3C has traditionally not had scope like other groups,
>>> for example:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Society_on_Social_Implications_of_Technology
>>>
>>> DID Methods are presently 'platform' or 'platform
>>> company' centric.
>>> https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#did-methods
>>>
>>> This may result in different 'webs' forming where
>>> platform providers have a vested interest in making them
>>> not work with other online resources. A means to address
>>> that problem may be to change the URI DID Method
>>> Construct (and governance framework) to support societal
>>> groups.
>>>
>>> in effect -Change the DID methods to support the
>>> notations based on legal stewards of the methods (and
>>> underlying content on whatever DLT technology employed,
>>> including means to migrate to another).
>>>
>>> - DID:UN, DID:WHO, DID:EU, DID:NL, DID:UK, DID:ITU, DID:W3C
>>> etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Re: different "webs" that is already the case. The idea of
>>> web architecture is that all the URI schemes can interact
>>> with one another via hyperlinks forming a multi protocol web
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_URI_schemes
>>>
>>> Two of biggest are http: and file: so that's good if you
>>> want a network effect, others are likely more niche
>>>
>>> DID is just a set of schemes, and sub schemes with a common
>>> JSON format and some agreed common structure, and set of
>>> functions
>>>
>>> It would be interesting to see if that can lead to a
>>> standardized way to write to the web, that is something more
>>> than HTTP POST, because that's something of a black box
>>>
>>> One reason is that, standardized ways to write to the web
>>> quickly become Turing Complete and in turn can lead to an
>>> web operating system
>>>
>>> In some sense, we're still a long way from standardizing
>>> that (a web OS). In other ways, it's happening in lots of
>>> places simultaneously with different groups
>>
>>
>> Here's my understanding:
>>
>> WebID -- an HTTP URI scheme based Identifier for a Person or
>> Agent that resolves to a Profile Document (a Credentials Store).
>>
>> WebID+TLS -- an authentication protocol in the form of a
>> TLS-handshake extension that adds a Profile Document lookup
>> facilitated by a WebID incorporated into an X.509 Certificate
>> via its Subject Alternative Name (SAN) slot.
>>
>> DiD or DID -- a Resolvable URI scheme (i.e., HTTP and others)
>> based Identifier for a Person or Agent that resolves to a
>> Profile Document.
>>
>> DiD or DID Methods -- various methods for authenticating
>> credentials in a Profile Document.
>>
>>
>> Sounds about right, Kingsley
>>
>> The did refers to a "controller", which could be a person,
>> organization, thing etc.
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/#did-controller
>
>
> I was referring to
> https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/#dfn-decentralized-identifiers
> which is analogous to a WebID, but not HTTP scheme specific i.e.,
> it is resovable, but doesn't mandate HTTP as the resolution
> mechanism. Basically, entity denoted by said identifier.
>
> (Distributed) ID vs (Web)ID .
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/#did-controller denotes an entity
> with create, read, write, delete privileges over a DID, not the
> Subject denoted by a DID.
>
>
>>
>> The controller can make changes to the DID Document. Now we need
>> to be careful with this term "Document" as defined in that spec.
>
>
> Note my comments above.
>
> A Document comprise content structured using a variety of
> content-types. Ultimately, said content is some form of Data
> Representation.
>
> Documents as Content Locations.
>
>
>>
>> Because it ("A set of data describing the DID subject") might not
>> 100% match what we think of as a web document
>
>
> A Web Document is simply a Docuemnt that's accessible via HTTP.
> Unfortunately, there is a general misconcpetion that this implies
> an HTML document.
>
>
>>
>> This leads to the question of whether the document is the data,
>> or whether the data is written ON a document, or an HTTP document
>
>
> Documents content takes the form of structured data i.e., the
> content is the data, discernible by a content-type (or mime-type).
>
>
>>
>> That's a subtle differentiation with I think slighlty different
>> constraints. These I expect will be explored when DID gets to
>> REC status and we see some more implementations
>>
>> I'll add that your idea of NetID
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/community/rww/wiki/NetID
>>
>> Has potentially the benefits of both systems, tho we've yet to
>> see this fully taken advantage of in terms of user profiles (e.g.
>> with youid and fingerprints)
>>
>> Perhaps it's something we can flesh out and document further
>
>
> A NetID is like a DID, but it doesn't have the notion of DID
> methods for specifying Authentication Protocol mechanics, it
> leaves authentication in the hands of logic.
>
>
> re NetID yes I get that
>
> The thing with DID Methods is that they give implementers a
> documentation and an implementation path for implementing each strategy
Yes.
>
> With NetID as we have it now, it's more of a stub, and we could
> perhaps guide implementors better, for example very interesting is
> your use of fingerprints in HTML docs, I think that could catch on ...
By looking to logic as the schema that informs everything. Thus,
authentication becomes a function of entity relationship types and
relationship type semantics processing.
The semantics of identity authenticity ultimately end up in an ontology
and associated inference rules, IMHO.
>
> Kingsley
>
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Home Page:http://www.openlinksw.com
Community Support:https://community.openlinksw.com
Weblogs (Blogs):
Company Blog:https://medium.com/openlink-software-blog
Virtuoso Blog:https://medium.com/virtuoso-blog
Data Access Drivers Blog:https://medium.com/openlink-odbc-jdbc-ado-net-data-access-drivers
Personal Weblogs (Blogs):
Medium Blog:https://medium.com/@kidehen
Legacy Blogs:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/
http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Profile Pages:
Pinterest:https://www.pinterest.com/kidehen/
Quora:https://www.quora.com/profile/Kingsley-Uyi-Idehen
Twitter:https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+:https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Web Identities (WebID):
Personal:http://kingsley.idehen.net/public_home/kidehen/profile.ttl#i
:http://id.myopenlink.net/DAV/home/KingsleyUyiIdehen/Public/kingsley.ttl#this
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2021 19:27:02 UTC