RE: Spamming a URI

What about a trusted source that logs RDF trust levels of RDF found at
different servers/ authors etc.


Lisa

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Joshua Allen
> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 6:39 AM
> To: Matt Halstead; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Spamming a URI
> 
> 
> 
> The semantic web is really no different than the regular WWW 
> in this respect.  We regard it as a virtue that *anyone* can 
> publish a web page, even if the web page contains lies.  We 
> also regard it as a virtue that anyone on the web can link to 
> any other page, even if the owner of the target page does not 
> know or support the person doing the linking.
> 
> You assess trust by considering the source, checking for 
> digital signatures, etc.  One way to add assurances to RDF: 
http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Matt Halstead
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 7:28 PM
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Spamming a URI
> 
> 
> I realize there is 'trust' in the semantic web cake[1], but I
> am intrigued to understand how this is envisaged to work at 
> even a simple RDF level.  If we have something as simple and 
> useful as a semantic web crawler, e.g. swoogle [2], then how 
> do we ignore the work of spammers which inappropriately 
> attribute properties and values to, or reference in any way, 
> a particular resource URI?
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/0412-RDF-functions/slide4-0.html
> [2] http://pear.cs.umbc.edu/swoogle/index.php
> 
> cheers
> Matt
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2004 15:01:44 UTC