W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2021

Re: Thoughts on the LDS WG chartering discussion

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 12:05:55 -0400
To: semantic-web@w3.org
Message-ID: <afcff244-752c-992c-9b93-b636c8b55782@digitalbazaar.com>
Dan Brickley wrote:
> <file:/dev/🦖/RGMv1> rdf:value “hex sequence here” ^wikidata:Q5153426 .

You've just described what Hashlinks do:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sporny-hashlink-07

Which we could use to generate triples of the form:

<hl:zQmWvQxTqbG2Z9HPJgG57jjwR154cKhbtJenbyYTWkjgF3e>
  schema:contentURL
    <https://rgm.example/file.txt> .

Or

<https://rgm.example/file.txt>
  sec:digest
    "QmWvQxTqbG2Z9HP7...btJenbyYTWkjgF3e"^sec:multihash

and then we could canonicalize those using RDH (there is a "simple
canonicalization" path in the algorithm when you don't have blank nodes to
contend with) and then express the signature using LDP and LDV.

Doing so is fairly trivial, but doesn't address many of use cases listed in
the LDS WG Charter.

If we put that in scope, Dan, would you be in favour of the charter? If we do,
we should do that without poking XML Digital Signatures in the eye and opening
all of those old wounds.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Friday, 11 June 2021 16:07:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:46:09 UTC