- From: Marco Brandizi <brandizi@ebi.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:51:15 +0100
- To: Damian Steer <pldms@mac.com>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org
Damian Steer wrote: > > So, as you suggest, we use graphs as the basis. We then mix in a > function P(A,G) => boolean, which tells us whether user A has permission > to query G. (or, indeed, to write or delete) > [...] > > SELECT ?privateinfo WHERE { :damian :knows ?privateinfo } > > becomes > > SELECT ?privateinfo WHERE { GRAPH ?g { :damian :knows ?privateinfo } > FILTER (?g = <allowed> || ?g = <alsoallowed>) } # please forgive my > syntax here > Hi, do you have some strategy to manage a use case like "N results exist, but you are authorized to see only k of them?". Moreover, I wonder if someone have ideas about mixing access to explicitly declared triples and inferred statements. For instance, if a triple is entailed by other triples the user hasn't access to, one should decide if the inferred triple is accessible (e.g.: is at the same level of details of the premise) or not (e.g.: the consequence represents an aggregate information). -- =============================================================================== Marco Brandizi <brandizi@ebi_NOSPAM_ac.uk> NET Project - Software Engineer http://www.ebi.ac.uk/net-project European Bioinformatics Institute Hinxton, CB10 1SD, United Kingdom Office A3141
Received on Friday, 5 September 2008 07:51:58 UTC