- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 08:15:11 -0400
- To: public-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5379F5CF.2020509@openlinksw.com>
On 5/18/14 9:09 PM, Timothy Holborn wrote: > I'm rather sure the problems can be solved by providing a WebID > ontology, that supports a range of binding mechanisms for WebID-TLS > (including current fixed:foaf methods). For ACLs you need an ACL Ontology. Kingsley > > With the exception of the use of the term "agents" (which I relate to > foaf definitions / use of the term) the spec is well designed [1]. > Perhaps whether agent means person or legal entity (for which the > identity instance applies) could be considered. > > I'm pleased it's been discussed more, at length. Clearly, it seems, > some ideologies are getting in the way of w3 standard that could be > more engaging for more people. > > > Timh. > [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/index.html > Sent from my iPad > > On 19 May 2014, at 10:40 am, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org > <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> wrote: > >> On 05/18/2014 08:17 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>> On 5/18/14 4:31 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>>> On 05/18/2014 01:59 PM, Nathan Rixham wrote: >>>>> I'd suggest that this is not a technical problem and cannot be >>>>> addressed this way. >>>>> >>>>> When you add reasoners in to the mix they can quickly determine >>>>> that typographically different (personas/agents/uris) refer to the >>>>> same thing, whatever approach is used. >>>> >>>> Not true. They might quickly determine that two personas are >>>> managed by the same person, but that is not the same as determining >>>> that the two personas are the same thing. >>> Only if you provide the information that makes that feasible. >>> >>>> >>>> Computers are perfectly capable of keeping track of my having >>>> multiple distinct mailing addresses, multiple distinct phone >>>> computers, multiple distinct phone numbers, etc. They know they >>>> belong to the same person, without getting confused and thinking >>>> actually each of my mailing addresses is the same or each of my >>>> android devices is the same. If they did, I couldn't exactly >>>> label one as being home and one as being office, or install some >>>> apps on one android device and not on another. >>>> >>>> This is not hard to solve - we just have to be clear that what's >>>> being authenticated and authorized is a persona/account, not a human. >>> >>> And why do you believe that: >>> >>> 1. WebID isn't clear about being an Identifier that denotes an Agent? >>> >>> 2. That WebID-Profile Documents aren't RDF documents that describe >>> the referents of WebIDs (i.e, they are Identity Cards) ? >>> >>> 3. That WebID-TLS isn't about authenticating the claims in the >>> WebID-Profile document ? >>> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, this doesn't match WebID's self-conception, so far. >>> Only if you are conflating WebID [1], WebID-Profile [2], and >>> WebID-TLS [3], which is still a general problem we have with the >>> term: WebID. >>> >> >> I'm fairly confident I know what those terms mean. I talked to folks >> coming out of the meeting where WebID-TLS was split from WebID, in >> Lyon, and got the story at the time. >> >>> WebID is simply an identifier that denotes an Agent. WebID-Profile >>> is a profile document that describes what a WebID denotes. >>> WebID-TLS is an authentication protocol that verifies the claims >>> made in a WebID-Profile document or Identity Card. >>> >>> Could it be that you are indicating to the spec editors that some >>> organizational issues exists re., layout and overall presentation? >>> if that's your concern, then I can certainly see where you might be >>> coming from etc.. >>> >> >> That was my hope when I started this threat, but that hope has died. >> >>> Links: >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/#the-webid-http-uri >> >> The diagram is very clear that the WebID denotes the person. >> >> You have also been very clear about that in your emails. >> >> Since the WebID is also what the user authenticates as, and what >> authorization is granted to, in the systems I've seen, that means the >> unit of authentication and authorization is the person. >> >> That's not acceptable to me as a user, and I think many other users >> will also find it unacceptable. >> >> I don't see how we can expect to build mass-market systems using >> WebID until this is changed. >> >> -- Sandro >> >>> [2] >>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/#publishing-the-webid-profile-document >>> >>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/tls/ >>> >>>> >>>> -- Sandro >>> >>> >> >> -- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Monday, 19 May 2014 12:15:34 UTC