- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 14:04:14 -0500
- To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EFB682E.8090602@openlinksw.com>
On 12/28/11 1:47 PM, Peter Williams wrote: > It was fun playing with ODS (and looking at it from modern goals), and > at some point seeing it present in my proxy profile facts listing me > as being POTENTIALLY linked to several other Peter Williams', in > gmail+. I started to see trust networking happen (facebook style). > but, I have a split personality. With one cert (and multiple SAN > URIs), I want trust network A to be in effect for SAN.A, and not B. So > I want to register with several gatekeeper (i.e. sparql servers > webid/https session), so my "call" can be differently routed, through > different briding points, ending up with a different trust chain, > suiting the (security label) requirements expressed in the endpoint > foaf cards. And that's how it should work. This is the Superman and 'Clark Kent' paradox. The basic test applied to our interest and implementations re. WebID :-) Linked Data -- at InterWeb scale -- plus the semantic fidelity that OWL brings to relations is the key to making this all happen. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder& CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:04:47 UTC