Re: Does FOAF provide sufficient ontological support for WebID & WWW Identity AUTH REQ's?

On 6/9/14 11:30 AM, Timothy Holborn wrote:
> Hi Kingsley,
>
> thanks for the response. Yes. Current format of WebID (specifically) 
> is simply FOAF.

No it isn't. A WebID is an HTTP URI that denotes an Agent. We have to 
accept this definition before any pursuit of clarity.

> Calling it WebID when it means FOAF is well...  FOAF.

See comment above.

FOAF is a vocabulary describes terms that can be used to construct and 
Identity Card or Profile Document that describes an entity denoted by a 
WebID.

WebID-Profile document is an example of a profile document constructed 
using FOAF vocabulary terms.

>
> When it starts to be used for authentication problems emerge - 
> authentication being a form of agreement that you knowingly access a 
> private record or access control value; that is protected by some form 
> of authentication.

Authenticating the identity claims in a WebID-Profile document is the 
first step. The fact that I can associate the entity described a FOAF 
based WebID-Profile with a keypair, by way of WebID de-reference is a 
step. That might still not be enough to satisfy the Authorization 
conditions described by an ACL or Data Access Policy.

>
> Assuming of course; the authentication mechanism isn't triggering off 
> approvals to other peoples stuff, but rather effectively providing 
> access to stuff on a legitimate (or as intended) basis...  perhaps 
> also, as understood by all involved parties too...

Why would it do such a thing?


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen