Re: Web Identity and Discovery - WebID 1.0

On 6 Feb 2013, at 13:47, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6 February 2013 12:39, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com> wrote:
> As promised, I have updated the spec according to the latest poll results. I've also cleaned it up a little, mainly fixing inconsistencies with some terms.
> 
> I would like to ask everyone to take a look and see if everything is ok before we move to WebID-TLS.
> 
> Here is the link to the latest version: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html
> 
> Minor thing:
> foaf:name
> The name of the individual or agent.
> foaf:knows
> The WebID URI of a known person.
> foaf:weblog
> The person or agent's blog URI
> I would keep name and knows in the example but rather have depiction, rather than, weblog, as this is a common identifier in modern social networks.  Additionally mbox is often a good thing to have, tho there may be some privacy issues on that one.
> 
> You're right. It's much more useful to have an example with foaf:img (updated the spec). If only people would use it instead of displaying the WebID URI after login. ;) 

Is there a relation that says that something is the editor of a page, or that it controls it?

Then it is easy to minially get a uniquely describing page by adding 

   <#me> contollerOf <> .

That is whoever controls this page is the agent referred to by <#me> . As it happens that
description would also be acceptable from the privacy point of view, as it certainly does not reveal that much.

Henry

>  
>  
> 
> Best,
> Andrei
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/