- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:56:14 -0400
- To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5075706E.8030100@openlinksw.com>
On 10/10/12 7:51 AM, Henry Story wrote: > On 10 Oct 2012, at 13:34, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > >> On 10/10/12 5:12 AM, Henry Story wrote: >>> But I think the question is here: is a 301 also a signal of a change of WebID, since >>> the document has moved permanently, do #uris in the old document also need to be >>> moved permanently? >>> >>> Henry >> Should it matter how routing occurs if the end result is a WebID and public key association that mirrors what's in the X.509 certificate? > That would be the simple answer - and that is I suppose the current position. > > But I am wondering about this, because when you have a 301 redirect the resulting document relative URLs get interpreted according to the redirected to URL. Yes. > > See Tim Berners Lee's point here: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2012Apr/0006.html > > So what happens then to #uris. After all they are also relative, right? Yes. > But now the question is > the other way around if you do a #uri on a moved document do you have a #uri on the moved document? Do you query the one or the other? Linked Data URIs simply denote entities. In the case of the WebID protocol, these entities are of type: foaf:Agent. All you ever do is de-reference the URI in the certificates SAN. Everything else is HTTP message exchange that's in effect routing. As you know, a hash URI simply delivers implicit rather than explicit indirection within the context of the Linked Data meme. > > I don't think this is well settled. ( But I'd be happy if we had real RFCs to point to if it has been settled ). To me its is settled, what's sometimes unclear is the fact that Linked Data is about name based *indirection* via de-referencable URIs. Basically, a Linked Data URI is a Data Source Name (a denotation) that uses *indirection* to resolve to a Data Source/Location/Address. > > In any case the issue in this thread was "transfer of WebID ownership". Does a 301 indicate an intent to move the WebID, just as it indicates a permanently moved resource? > > I don't know. It may or may not. A WebID verification engine can only make the final determination from the result of the WebID and Public Key association lookup. Basically, do the claims (WebID and Public Key relationship) in the X.509 certificate mirror those in the eventual profile graph (structured data bearing relationship mirror), following WebID de-reference. We have to keep WebID in the realm of entity relationship semantics rather that HTTP message exchange mechanics. Kingsley > > Henry > >> -- >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > -- 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, 10 October 2012 12:56:41 UTC