- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 14:11:52 +0200
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLti44DaAKaPr3VNL6+GJHGXubSH0DJvN18MR7qYMyN1w@mail.gmail.com>
On 3 June 2013 13:43, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > On 6/3/13 7:18 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > > > > On 3 June 2013 13:16, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > >> On 6/3/13 3:26 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> >> WebKeys has some significant advantages to the cert ontology in many >> ways, as the cert ontology only does auth, but the webkeys ontology does >> auth / signing / encryption / verification and lays the way for payments. >> >> Cert only allows a subset of keys, such as RSA (indeed RSA is the only >> implemented key in WebID+TLS), webkeys allows any key, including DSA, >> Elliptic curve etc. >> >> Webkeys allows any type of profile, including FOAF, schema.org, open >> graph protocol etc. whereas cert is tied to FOAF. >> >> Webkeys allows associating a key with an account, whereas cert only >> associates a key with a FOAF agent. >> >> These points have been brought up in the community group and you have >> each argued against them, and made it clear that you were opposed. That's >> why manu did not join the xg, and has made an independent work. >> >> That all said, done is done, and it would be good to see things working >> together now. >> >> >> WebKeys is a great compliment to WebID. In a nutshell, having the >> ability to exploit WebID by having it loosely coupled to X.509 certificates >> is a major contribution to our collective WOT pursuit. >> > > Kingsley, do you think implementations should start to adopt webkey as > well as the cert ontology? > > > I for one don't see any ontology as gospel. To me, genius inherent in the > Web lies in the fact that we can all carve out our own puzzle pieces and > then stitch them together using logic via relationship semantics. > > I do believe in giving URIs to anything of importance since that aids Web > interactions with data. Thus, I ensure my Public Keys have URIs. > > Benefit of denoting Public Keys with URIs? > > The benefit (to me) is that when something like Webkeys comes along it > enables negation of unnecessary control points and controllers. For > instance, I don't have to wait for those tha control HTTP to figure out the > utility of the "From: " request header etc.. I can just do my own > triangulation via the "Authorization: " header and the keyid component and > the IFP semantics of mailto: scheme URIs. > > Key point: don't be distracted by the pursuit of a golden ontology to > which others will be made to comply. I think part of the problem with the > Semantic Web is the misconception that it will only work as a result of > golden ontologies. Personally, I believe the opposite is the case. > Ontologies are just mini guides for constructing puzzle pieces, so taking > them beyond that level turns them into distracting control points that can > impede progress and then generate endless debates etc.. [1]. > > > At this point, as per my mail about "just do it!" mode, we are > implementing Webkeys as just another addition to our WOT offerings that > leverages WebID. > OK that makes sense, so: I think the core WebID identity spec remains largely consistent in both cases. So which ontology you use depends on your needs. If you want to guarantee auth over x.509 with rsa and foaf, you can use Henry's ontology If you want to guarantee auth / signing / encryption / payments use manu's Re: the namespace, I think manu's will be at w3id.org which may actually be better than w3.org, so im unsure there's a need to merge, but that's a possible route. > > Links: > > 1. > http://www.slideshare.net/stefandecker1/stefan-decker-keynote-at-cshals/29-- problem with ontologies . > > Kingsley > > > >> >> -- >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> > > > -- > > 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 > > > >
Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 12:12:21 UTC