- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:09:38 -0400
- To: public-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <50041292.5040400@openlinksw.com>
On 7/13/12 4:09 PM, Henry Story wrote: >> >Also, I didn't see OAuth [0] mentioned so much in what I've read so far. > Because I have not studied it. Is it close? Have we covered OAuth with one > Relation in WebID? That would be cool! Yes! > > cert:secretary or cert:assistant etc.. basically nail the entire OAuth value prop. Right now, I have a WebID ACL scoped to foaf:knows relationship. I might just as well have one that's scoped to cert:secretary etc.. OAuth is too coarse and code oriented (again) because to programmers (sadly) every problem requires chunks of code rather that underlying data structures that bear rich semantic relationships. Data vs. Code issue continues to rare its head repeatedly after 40 or so years. OAuth is only useful re. compatibility with services already us it. Beyond that, its value is utterly limited re. delegated authorization in a Web of complex relationships. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 13:09:39 UTC