Re: Should WebIDs denote people or accounts?

On 5/18/14 11:13 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> On May 18, 2014 11:01:38 AM EDT, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>> On 5/17/14 8:05 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> Oh, very interesting.   I haven't found an opportunity to talk to
>> TimBL about this specifically, but it sounds like he's thinking in the
>> same direction.   In that email he's very clearly showing a WebID
>> denoting a persona, not a person.
>> Sandro,
>>
>> A WebID denoting an Agent isn't disjoint with the notion of personae.
> I'm fairly sure it is, Kingsley.
>
> If my WebIDs all denote me, then you can't grant access to one without granting it to all, by RDF semantics.

Why are you assuming that any of my profile documents have an owl:sameAs 
relation, connection the identities denoted by the HTTP URI based 
Identifiers? Likewise, if there's no relation facilitated by an IFP how 
do you arrive at such, via semantics expressed in RDF based relations?

>
> To avoid that undesired fate, I think you need WebIDs to denote personas.

No, a persona is derived from the claims that coalesce around an 
identifier. A persona is a form of identification. A collection of RDF 
claims give you a persona.

>    As I mentioned, those personas might be software agents, but they are clearly not people.

WebIDs denote Agents. An Agent could be a Person, Organization, or 
Machine (soft or hard). You can make identification oriented claims in a 
Profile Document using RDF based on a WebID.

We don't have a problem have a problem here at all.


Kingsley
>
>      - Sandro
>
>> When I demonstrate WebIDs across Facebook, LinkedIn Twitter, G+, and
>> many other social media spaces [2][3], I actually refer to the whole
>> things as being about a given persona.  None of that negates the fact
>> that a WebID denotes an Agent.
>>
>> We have to loosely couple:
>>
>> 1. identity
>> 2. identifiers
>> 3. identification
>> 4. identity verification (e.g., when authenticating identification)
>> 5. trust.
>>
>> Claims represented as RDF statements handle 1-5, naturally. We don't
>> have a problem here, really.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persona
>> [2] https://twitter.com/kidehen/status/419578364551499776
>> [3] https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/posts/1pmt4gWWae2
>
>
>


-- 

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