W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > November 2011

Re: long term webid of peter, contrary to rumour

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:48:07 -0500
Message-ID: <4EC03B17.60200@openlinksw.com>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
CC: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
On 11/13/11 3:53 PM, Henry Story wrote:
> On 13 Nov 2011, at 21:31, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 11/13/11 4:48 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>>> On 13 Nov 2011, at 01:52, Peter Williams wrote:
>>>> atyorkporc.wordpress.com <http://yorkporc.wordpress.com/>ive hosted 
>>>> on the blog's front page the site's contact page (fromwordpress.com 
>>>> <http://wordpress.com/>). It has in HTML the kind of information 
>>>> normally shown in a foaf card. it has my long term webid, hosted on 
>>>> an opera unite endpoint. Its not a foaf card like others and 
>>>> neither is the endpoint (being only available when I am online).
>>> That's ok. As the spec points out ( 
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/ ) all that is required 
>>> for WebID is the publication of the public key at that endpoint with 
>>> some RDF markup. (btw, we should perhaps add a link to the W3C how 
>>> to on publishing multiple formats in a content negated format)
>> Is it about publication of a public key with RDF markup? Is that the 
>> narrative? If it is, then be up front about it as I am tired of 
>> cycling this RDF wagon re. the problem it introduces, unnecessarily.
>> If this is an RDF only solution, say so, and stick to it. Then live 
>> with the consequences.
> Is there an issue you have with the spec? If so please tell us.

I have an issue with narratives the end up with RDF as being 
inextricable re. WebID and its verification protocol. That's what I have 
an issue with. If the spec toes that line, then I have a problem with 
the spec. If the spec is RDF specific then qualify the whole thing as 
RDF based WebID, nice and simple.

> Most implementations I know of now are working with RDF 
> serialisations, so those are the ones we should be sticking by 
> initially, as we did from the very start.

Again, what on earth does that mean? That there will be a narrative 
utterly laced with that bias? Again, there's nothing wrong with saying: 
this is RDF based WebID etc.. That's better that pretending it isn't be 
it via spec or narrative.

> Those serialisations are well documented and clearly specified.

>>> I see that your WebID Profile Page - as it is called in the spec 
>>> section 2.3 - is in html. So I guess it's meant to be parsed as RDFa.
>>> The RDFa http://www.w3.org/2007/08/pyRdfa/ validation service seems 
>>> to only return a few URLs for your page.
>>> I don't see that you have specified any of the cert or rsa 
>>> namespaces so if you want to turn that into a WebID you do need to 
>>> follow the explanation here
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/#rdfa-html-notation
>>> If you find problems or unclarities in any aspect of the spec, 
>>> please explain which part of the text is unclear, and what wording 
>>> you suggest would help improve it.
>> You are talking syntax again. Can WebID not be discussed conceptually 
>> without syntax specificity? Is this impossible?
> I am talking spec.
> In the future when semantics is more clearly and widely understood 
> then one will no longer need to mentions syntax. But at present that 
> is not the case. The document is an evolving one.
> Henry
>> Kingsley
>>> Henry
>>>> I happen to enforce more privacy than perhaps do most consumers 
>>>> (being a security type engineer who is experimenting with semantic 
>>>> web ideas, as they evolve). I know some folks want foaf cards as 
>>>> public data, cacheable by search engines and others maintaining 
>>>> huge triple stores. I dont. I want to assert my privacy 
>>>> expectations (becuase in the US, one has no rights until they are 
>>>> asserted - this being the way that social laws on privacy happen to 
>>>> be structured.) And I do this in ways that may not meet the 
>>>> idealized, academically-normalized semantic web concept, which 
>>>> assumes you have public documents that anyone can browse, cache, 
>>>> cite from, etc.
>>>> Now
>>>> does anyone know HOW to make a wordpress contact page embed either
>>>> (1) an XML stream, coding up the xml-serializion of a foaf card 
>>>> (e.g. the output of foaf.me), or
>>>> (2) the RDFa of a foaf card.
>>>> I cannot make either work.
>>>> I seem to remember that one was supposed to be able to add  "XML 
>>>> data island" as a subelement in HTML (since XHTML is just an XML 
>>>> vocab). One is supposed to be able to embed RDFa tags in HTML 
>>>> elements too. Unfortunately, the wordpress site strips out what I 
>>>> add (refusing to host them). Ill guess that these are default 
>>>> safety options, that can be removed by those who know how.
>>>> My wordpress blogsite is hosted by wordpress cloud service, not by 
>>>> me on a server (im not sufficient competent to run a production 
>>>> server). So, there may be less ability to change the configuration 
>>>> to offer RDFa and XML embedding, than a site one hosts on a private 
>>>> server.
>>> Social Web Architect
>>> http://bblfish.net/
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> Kingsley Idehen	
>> President&  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
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/



Kingsley Idehen	
President&  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

Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 21:48:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:48 UTC