RE: Email Address as FOAF term

Suppose my software agent encounters a 
foaf:mbox or foaf:mbox_sha1sum term, how can my agent 
discover more information about the agent it has 
now "identified"? Is there a function that will take 
one of these values as input and return the subject?
Is there a database where these terms are a key? How 
about Swoogle?

John 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Brickley
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 10:30 AM
> To: Christopher Schmidt
> Cc: john.nj.davies@bt.com; Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk;
> Kianoush.Eshaghi@metadat.at; charles@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Email Address as FOAF term
> 
> 
> 
> * Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt@crschmidt.net> [2004-09-29 
> 10:22-0400]
> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 01:49:51PM +0100, 
> john.nj.davies@bt.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > There is also the mbox_sha1sum property which uses a hash 
> of your email
> > > address to uniquely identify you if you do not wish to 
> disclose your
> > > email address.
> > > 
> > >   <foaf:mbox_sha1sum>
> > >      3edg453144de22607a169e585c487967d035cd27
> > >   </foaf:mbox_sha1sum> 
> > 
> > As with all literals, you should keep in mind that adding 
> newlines like 
> > this significantly changes the value of the literal, which 
> is a bad thing
> > with terms like this where the sha1sum is used as a unique 
> identifier:
> > 
> > <mbox_sha1sum>2388d8d8d</mbox_sha1sum>
> > 
> > is different, and will not smush with,
> > 
> > <mbox_sha1sum>
> > 2388d8d8d
> > </mbox_sha1sum>
> > 
> > Common practice is to include only the 40 character hash, 
> and not any
> > whitespace or newlines.
> 
> It was recently (foafcamp and foaf galway meetings) re-drawn to my
> attention that language tagging also affects plain literal 
> comparisons. 
> The FOAF spec should probably be updated to encourage people not to
> language tag mbox_sha1sum, and to note some extra conventions for
> identity reasoning here (ie. ignoring lang tagging) which go 
> beyond what
> generic tools will be able to accomplish.
> 
> Dan
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2004 19:22:48 UTC