W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > January 2012

Re: WebID equivalence

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:46:03 -0500
Message-ID: <4F04824B.6070307@openlinksw.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
CC: Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk>, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, public-xg-webid@w3.org
On 1/4/12 10:58 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> Linked Data is about using networks (graph structures and hypertext
> structures, cleverly combined) to describe things. In some
> circumstances, one or the other aspect takes primacy; and in some
> circumstances, one or the other side can be a bit of a burden. That's
> fine so long as we don't insist too heavily that all good data must
> fit some rigid template of being hypertext-published interconnected
> graphs.

WebID is insisting heavily without accepting burden related realities for:

1. developers of WebID verifiers
2. publishers of identity oriented claims.

This is what I fear will lead to bootstrap inertia, inevitably.

The goal in its most basic form boils down to testing for "mirrored 
claims" about identity across an idp space (on a network) and a local 
key store. This goal is achievable without surfacing some of the more 
burdensome aspects of Linked Data. IMHO. graph portability is the most 
important factor of all. The claims graph should be loosely coupled to 
the network.



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
Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2012 16:50:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:54 UTC