- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 18:09:44 +0200
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 06:17:52PM +0100, Dan Brickley wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 17:13, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > > > 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. > > > Yeah, after sending it, I realized we also have data:URIs from 1996, which > do much of the work too. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2397/ > > I appreciate your absolutely natural wariness of old wounds and the > daunting heritage of XML Signature. But we do all seem to agree that the > are a few options for trivial transformations that bring non-RDF content > into an RDF form suitable for Linked Data Signing. > > I can believe that a new WG might not want to go anywhere near XML > Signature. I do believe W3C team, TAG and AC as a body and AC reps IMO, the reason for this charter not to go anywhere near XML DSig is that it ain't broke (and we'd re-stage the XML vs. RDF wars, possibly with an additional JSON army coming in to slaughter their weakened ranks). > individually have some responsibility to weigh these tradeoffs. W3C can’t > afford to make many new frameworks for signing web content, so if this one > is (like XML Signature) something that can sign any content but is named > after the format its workings are written in, we ought to make that clear > to AC in the charter. Somehting like this?: [[ RDF Signatures can include Hashlinks or data: IRIs, as well as RDF Literals quoting signed text. In this regard, RDF Signatures can be used to sign non-RDF content, either by inclusion or by reference. ]] > There are two reasons this work has “Linked Data” in the name. One is the > special attention it gives to making RDF more usefully content hashable and > signable, and the other is that its own data is expressed in RDF. > > Can we tease these two aspects apart a little? The former is just useful to > get done for RDF folks regardless of signature, … but the latter piece > (which is applicable, we agree, to all content) does seem to have the > ingredients for being a modern successor to some subset of the > sign-any-web-content goals of XML Signature, and perhaps browser / web > platform usecases too. That is territory where people may be alienated by > the commitment to RDF, of course. But it is also potentially a route to > much greater impact for this work. I tried to clarify the second aspect in this line: <https://github.com/w3c/lds-wg-charter/pull/73/files#diff-0eb547304658805aad788d320f10bf1f292797b5e6d745a3bf617584da017051R320>. I would still like something so explicit to replace "The Working Group will define a framework" because "framework" doesn't tell me what it is, or even whether it's a program or a data structure. @danbri, do you want to noodle on some wording? (I feel like text should be minimal; the previous paragraph about OWA and arbitrarily-large graphs states the obvious in a way that edit-by-committee tends to do.) > Dan > > > > > > -- 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 Saturday, 12 June 2021 16:10:05 UTC