W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > April 2013

Re: Domain of :key

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 18:23:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhKnOUCPD=fBVaN_eze+bE7gf=+Sb7tmtFnAoqQnZxw=3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
On 1 April 2013 18:05, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

>
> On 1 Apr 2013, at 18:01, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/1/13 11:56 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Though I think we have consensus slightly in favour rdfs : Resource
> >>
> >> It is clear that there is no consensus at present. I still don't have a
> clear use case for why you want what
> >> you want.
> >>
> >> Henry
> >
> > There is consensus about the need for a relation that associates an
> rdfs:Resource (or owl:Thing) with a public key. What's clearly in dispute
> is the appropriate relation :-)
>
> Put that way we are getting closer to something I can agree with. But the
> use case for the relation from owl:Thing to the public key needs to be
> developed. This use case will probably help work out what the name of the
> relation should be and what its meaning would need to be.
>

Clearly, the term used to relate anyURI to an key should be "key"

One other point arises.  Should WebID/TLS have a dependency on FOAF.  This
would exclude people like facebook etc.


>
> Henry
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>
Received on Monday, 1 April 2013 16:23:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:43 UTC