- From: Sampo Syreeni <decoy@iki.fi>
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:59:04 +0200 (EET)
- To: ben syverson <w3@likn.org>
- cc: semantic-web@w3.org
On 2006-03-17, ben syverson wrote: > Even if you're simply referencing the original, my issue is that the > assertions contained within are implicitly trusted, and not > attributed. What's the difference between... <statement #1.1> <you> <trust> <statement #2.1> <statement #1.2> <you> <trust> <statement #2.2> ... <statement #2.1> <me> <first-name> <Sampo> <statement #2.1> <me> <last-name> <Syreeni> ... ...and... <file of statements #1> <you> <trust> <file of statements #2> ... <file of statements #2> <me> <first-name> <Sampo> <file of statements #2> <me> <last-name> <Syreeni> ... ...besides the means of aggregation and/or brevity? I mean, I certainly wouldn't trust just any .rdf file I can find on the net, and neither does the RDF layer cake suggest I should, at least without a proper digital signature on the file and a chain of trust from me to the signature. The chain of trust can then be encoded in triples as shown above, and the special case where one needs to refer to just parts of a document can be handled via reification proper. -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 22:59:13 UTC