Re: Inrupt WebIDs

On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 7:48 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:52 PM Angelo Veltens <angelo.veltens@online.de>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 12.08.22 um 20:18 schrieb Melvin Carvalho:
>>
>>
>> https://id.inrupt.com/aveltens
>>> https://twitter.com/aveltens
>>>
>> Just, regarding the twitter URI
>>
>> It's slightly problematic because it is mixing the document and the data
>>
>> So something that applies to the document (e.g. created) would also apply
>> to the user, when actually both were created at different times
>>
>>
>> Of course you are right, but twitter is not caring for linked data
>> practices.
>>
>> Inrupt does it correctly by redirecting to a document URL. I am only
>> talking about the familarity of this URI style for most users.
>>
>
> I found some explanation for the WebID pattern used here:
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> https://github.com/solid/webid-profile/issues/40#issuecomment-1215731076
>

The thread above makes quite interesting reading, wrt specific comments on
WebID

For example:

"While the WebID Specification over eight years old now, does not
explicitly say that a profile must be editable, *almost the entire document
is about writing to the profile* so the assumption that the profile is
writable"

https://github.com/solid/webid-profile/issues/40#issuecomment-1228028176

If the document is giving that impression, it possibly is something worth
clarifying in future versions of the text.


>
>
>> Kind regards,
>> Angelo
>>
>