Re: foaf:openid and validity

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Matthias Quasthoff
<> wrote:
> Melvin Carvalho schrieb:
>> Your Web ID should be a foaf:Person
>> and your openid should be a URI
> According to FOAF my openid should be a foaf:Document, and that's my
> problem.
> My Web ID is <>. From the semantics of OpenID I
> do not see why <> should not be my OpenID. IMHO
> any resource should qualify to be my OpenID.

Yes, this is a case not supported by having foaf:openid's range be
foaf:Document. I'm willing to relax this if the consensus of the
OpenID community is that OpenID URIs (can? always?) directly identify
people, rather than their personas/accounts.

Also note that claim that the class foaf:Person is disjoint with class
foaf:Document doesn't fit with treating tattood people as documents. I
don't think the sky would fall in if we made in non-nonsensical to
assert that something was simultaneously a person and a document.
However I don't look forward to explaining it in the documentation...


Received on Sunday, 24 January 2010 20:45:10 UTC