Re: Web Identity and Discovery - WebID 1.0

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

>
> 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:nameThe name of the individual or agent.foaf:knowsThe WebID URI of
>> a known person.foaf:weblogThe 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.
>

There are foaf:maker and foaf:primaryTopic. AFAIK, there is no ontology
using controllerOf.

Andrei


> Henry
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>>
>
>     Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>