Re: WebID default serialization for WebID 2.x

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 14:00, Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>
wrote:

> Melvin,
>
> You asked about Turtle and conneg and then proceeded to comment about
> unrelated points?
>

I was responding to your quote: "If one specific RDF serialization would be
mandated, I can say already now that we would not support such WebID spec"

With the simple point that WebID already mandates one specific
serialization, namely turtle.  I asked you if you implemented it.  And you
gave a pointer to an unfinished implementation

So, I favour leaving the 1.x branch intact, so that you will be able to
finish your implementation


>
> > In summary.  Issues with this deployment:
> > - certificate leads to browser errors
>
> What errors? The client cert prompt? Not a server nor a WebID problem.
>

> > - cross origin requests will break
>
> We don't use CORS, we use a Linked Data proxy instead.
>
> > - I didnt see any CORS headers
>
> Same as above.
>
> > - the Agent type does not dereference
>
> Did I say this was a finished project?
>
> > - different content types give different semantic data
>
> And? Where do you get the expectation that HTML should serve the same
> data? It might be able to, but first we would have to implement a
> HTML+RDFa representation.
>

What's the point of conneg, in conjunction with the semantic web, if I will
get different machine readable data based, on which Accept header I send?

The machine reading the data has no way of knowing what header to send,
without out-of-band knowledge

>
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> This reminds me of something that is probably underspecified in the
> >> current draft, namely that the Agent and the PublicKey can in
> >> principle be in separate RDF documents.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 11:30 AM Melvin Carvalho
> >> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 10:49, Martynas Jusevičius <
> martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> If one specific RDF serialization would be mandated, I can say
> already
> >> >> now that we would not support such WebID spec. Our servers can
> produce
> >> >> any format Jena supports, plus HTML, for every RDF resource, so that
> >> >> would not be possible even if we wanted to.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Do you already support the current WebID 1.x spec?  Because it
> mandates turtle right now:
> >> >
> >> > "must be available as text/turtle [turtle], but may be available in
> other RDF serialization formats"
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Top Linked Data researchers pretending not to understand content
> >> >> negotiation raises my eyebrows. It has been a feature of HTTP since
> >> >> forever.
> >> >>
> >> >> The effort to dumb down RDF Linked Data to make it more accessible to
> >> >> some mythical "developers" continues to amaze me. Those developers
> >> >> most likely do not even need Linked Data as they don't have the sort
> >> >> of problems it addresses.
> >> >> We shouldn't be looking at easy solutions, we should be looking at
> >> >> first principles and the *right* solutions.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Martynas
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 2:23 AM Sebastian Hellmann
> >> >> <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hi Jonas,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 22.01.22 01:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Quoting Sebastian Hellmann (2022-01-22 00:21:49)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hi Jonas,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > a question: I am having trouble finding the current spec. Also I
> can not
> >> >> > find anything about NetID. See more inline.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Current draft of the WebID spec is this:
> >> >> > https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Are you sure that this is a spec? I see it as an inspirational
> document on how a spec could look like, if you spent the effort to work on
> it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I saw that you forked the spec into github, but I would actually
> propose to start from scratch and just do cherry picking from this
> document. When we implemented it, we had to rely mostly on personal
> experience and things we remembered from Henry Story's presentations, when
> he was on WebID tour over a decade ago, AKSW people and OpenLink docu.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > See .e.g:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "3. The WebID HTTP URI"  -> Is HTTPS not mandatory? Will we be
> able to move forward by including HTTP in any form?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "There are two solutions that meet our requirements for
> identifying real-world objects: 303 redirects and hash URIs."  -> how do
> 303 redirects identify real-world objects? URIs that resolve to 303? hash
> URIs might also resolve to 303.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Personal details are the most common requirement when registering
> an account with a website. Some of these pieces of information include an
> e-mail address, a name and perhaps an avatar image, expressed using the
> FOAF [FOAF] vocabulary. This section includes properties that SHOULD be
> used when conveying key pieces of personal information but are NOT REQUIRED
> to be present in a WebID Profile:"
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <#me> a owl:Thing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 1. Hash URI ✅
> >> >> > 2. Turtle   ✅
> >> >> > These are all MUST requirements, I could find. Doesn't even need
> the foaf:PersonalProfileDocument declaration,  so ✅ valid WebID
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "5.4 Privacy" -> is this in scope of "how to publish WebIDs"?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 6. Processing the WebID Profile: The Requesting Agent needs to
> fetch the document, if it does not have a valid one in cache.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It is recommended that the Requesting Agent sets a qvalue for
> text/turtle in the HTTP Accept-Header with a higher priority than in the
> case of application/xhtml+xml or text/html, as sites may produce HTML
> without RDFa markup but with a link to graph encoded in a pure RDF format
> such as Turtle.
> >> >> > For an agent that can parse Turtle, rdf/xml and RDFa, the
> following would be a reasonable Accept header:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Accept:
> text/turtle,application/rdf+xml,application/xhtml+xml;q=0.8,text/html;q=0.7
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <rhetorical>What?</rhetorical>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -- Sebastian
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
>