RE: WebID equivalence

So the experiment most went fine until the end - since on testing I note dthat the described resource when rendered only has pointers to the (inferred) cert:key entities. They are not embedded. This seems to be a side-effect of using the DESRIBE verb, which does fine when producing data for a browser - which enables folks to link around as usual.  It presumably confuses Validation agents expecting to have a self-contained document for the data source. Do we expect the machine validation agent to resolve such references, as a side-effect of the execution path formed for the particular query that might reference entities that are only available by FURTHER acts of de-referencing? or, is there a way of making the DESCRIBE verb always embed particular entities, such as the cert:key constructed object(s)? (I tried changing the DESCRIBE query, to have binding variables for cert:mod cert:exp, hoping that this would influence the construction. But that made no diffeence)   
   
having got a sparql query that describes a profile (due to inference) that my yorkporc2 name is is bound to a webfinger acct URI, and thence to a couple of cert:keys stored in the ODS repository of triples, Im going to make a cert whose SAN is the sparql protocol URI - whose describe verb generates the inferred profile on the fly. Lets see what happens at henrys site.
 
 
 
 
 
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 21:39:12 -0500
> From: kidehen@openlinksw.com
> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
> Subject: Re: WebID equivalence
> 
> On 1/3/12 8:27 PM, Mo McRoberts wrote:
> > On 4 Jan 2012, at 00:56, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> >
> >> Use a Name to do things that fit the Name Role. Don't use was many think is an Address as a Name, certainly not at first blush irrespective of deeper prowess. Use an Address for functionality folks intuitively associate with addresses e.g., data access. Use Names to Identity things.
> > I a feeling this paragraph is meant to be fundamental to your point, but I honestly can't make head nor tail of it.
> 
> Use a Name to Name things. Does an HTTP URI instinctively come across to 
> the typical Web Developer as a Name? It doesn't. It comes across an an 
> Address. The level of indirection is no more than 1.
> >
> > It's probably not worth the hassle of point out that both DN and subjectAltName are called “names” in X.509.
> 
> You have a generic Name and a function specific Name (e.g. an Address). 
> In the CN examples I've given you have examples of two address types 
> i.e., http: scheme and mailto: scheme. The intuition of "Address" is 
> there. Likewise, the intuition of a generic name re. Subject Alternative 
> Name.
> 
> >   Only one (and even then, only parts of it) — the DN — is readily presented in interfaces, and where it is, it’s done so as a label.
> 
> That isn't my the core issue here. Basically, the use as label doesn't 
> determine its semantics. Why are there examples of CN's with URLs all 
> over the place then?
> 
> > The subjectAltName is an implementation device, unlike host-meta is or the Link HTTP response header.
> 
> It's a slot for Names in the generic sense. You can use URIs as well as 
> other identifiers in this slot. Also please remember a URI != HTTP URI, 
> solely.
> 
> [SNIP]
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>