- 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