[rdfweb-dev] PPD

Michael Brian Orr mike at michael-brian-orr.net
Fri Feb 6 22:24:37 UTC 2004


I'm not arguing against a stopgap. 

My question - I'd characterize it as such, rather than
an argument, 'cause I really am just beginning to try to
grok this stuff - is not whether it's wise to do a
stopgap. Actually I think the perfect solution (in terms
of authenticity) is important, but some ways off, and I
think your position of doing something "sub-optimal
but...in the right direction" is appropriate, in fact
highly valuable. 

Rather, I'm viewing a sub-optimal but pragmatic solution
to "endorsed by subject", perhaps of the
endorsed-by-reply-from-subject-mbox kind, as something
that will be necessary for many domains, for a limited
but crucial period of time, and I'm wondering whether
the foaf community couldn't innovate this in a way
that's not so domain-specific. My sense is that I may be
asking about a nondestructive refactoring of the ppd
idea? 

Perhaps something like morphing the "I made this" part
of "I made this and it's about me" into "my mbox
endorsed this" (pragmatically, a service sent a request
for confirmation to this mailbox, and confirmation was
received). Then equality of endorsing mailbox and
subject mailbox approximates the ppd semantic, but in a
way that could be more easily adopted by other
communities? 

Anyway, thanks for your patience, 
Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny666 at virgilio.it] 
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 12:27 PM
> To: Michael Brian Orr; 'Ian Davis'; 'Julian Bond'
> Cc: rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> Subject: RE: [rdfweb-dev] PPD
> 
> I think your argument against against a stopgap
solution to "about vs.
> mentions" is strong. But it should be possible to tie
a PPD 
> mesh down to signed data somewhere. Even if there is
just one 
> point of authenticity, it would allow heuristic-based
trust 
> measures like Ian's hinting. Ok, so while we're
dependent on 
> heuristics it'll be sub-optimal, but at leat it's
pointing in 
> the right direction.
> 
> Basically I've a feeling that there's a 
> not-extraordinarily-difficult but still
doing-the-right-thing 
> (keeping Morten happy) solution around here
somewhere...
> 
> Cheers,
> Danny.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rdfweb-dev-bounces at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > [mailto:rdfweb-dev-bounces at vapours.rdfweb.org]On
Behalf Of Michael 
> > Brian Orr
> > Sent: 06 February 2004 18:01
> > To: 'Ian Davis'; 'Julian Bond'
> > Cc: rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > Subject: RE: [rdfweb-dev] PPD
> >
> >
> > As a lurker of this list and a newbie to the entire
arena, 
> I've been 
> > increasingly puzzled and frustrated by this thread,
and last 
> > night[PST]'s traffic finally crossed the gotta chime

> threshold for me. 
> > What follows seems to me an important point, but
maybe it's 
> actually a 
> > beginner's plea for instruction and I just don't
know it yet ;^}
> >
> > The point that various foaf processors need to
recognize 
> about-ness as 
> > opposed to mentioned-ness seems clear, but it also
seems clear (to 
> > this member of the peanut gallery, anyway) that such

> necessity is just 
> > as clear for foaf-unaware as for foaf-aware ones,
and this 
> seems to me 
> > the crux. For a domain ontology - particular foaf,
given its 
> > pioneer/exemplar role - to create special vocabulary
here 
> seems to set 
> > a bad precedent.
> >
> > As has been pointed out in prior rounds of this
thread, the 
> > real/ultimate solution is quite thorny because it
involves general 
> > questions of identity and authority:
> > the document has to be signed, it has to be
recognizable to 
> the world 
> > that the signer has authority with respect to the
topic, 
> and there has 
> > to be some way of dealing with off-the-wall claims.
Subject 
> matter for 
> > some future TR.
> >
> > We aren't there yet, and the immediate answer will
necessarily be 
> > simpler, subject to abuse, etc. But this is
something that many 
> > ontologies will need to handle, and what foaf could
do is show the 
> > rest of the world how we're going to do it without
resorting to 
> > domain-specific vocabulary (or with, but that
doesn't seem 
> like a good 
> > thing).
> >
> > Respectfully,
> > Mike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: rdfweb-dev-bounces at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > > [mailto:rdfweb-dev-bounces at vapours.rdfweb.org] On
> > Behalf Of Ian Davis
> > > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 5:04 AM
> > > To: Julian Bond
> > > Cc: rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > > Subject: Re: [rdfweb-dev] PPD
> > >
> > > Hi Julian,
> > >
> > > On Friday, February 6, 2004, 12:35:04 PM, Julian
Bond
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Two foaf files.
> > > > 1) Person A plus 100 foaf:knows from them to
Persons
> > x
> > > > 2) Person B plus 100 foaf:knows from them to
Persons
> > x, one
> > > of which is
> > > > Person A and includes their mbox_sha1sum, a
seeAlso
> > to the
> > > first file
> > > > and that's it. File one is rich with info about
> > Person A.
> > > File 2 really
> > > > only has info about Person B, one piece of which
is
> > "They
> > > know Person A"
> > >
> > > > How does an aggregator recognise the difference
> > between the
> > > two so that
> > > > it can later cough up the first and not the
second
> > in a list about
> > > > Person A? Answer: by looking for topic, maker,
made,
> > XML
> > > Structure, lack
> > > > of foaf:knows etc etc in file 1) for Person A.
Or
> > because it found a
> > > > foaf:primaryTopic pointing at A.
> > >
> > > I'm still unsure what the social value of
producing
> > this information
> > > is aside from techie curiosity but still...
> > >
> > > I would rank the files in the order of number of
> > triples involving
> > > non-IFP properties where the person appears as
subject
> > or object. i.e.
> > > I'd exclude any triples containing weblog,
mailbox,
> > mailbox_sha1sum
> > > etc since those are used as identifiers not
> > descriptors. Any file with
> > > a rank higher than 0 is describing the person in
some
> > way, you can set
> > > your threshold wherever you like to show only the
> > really descriptive
> > > ones.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://internetalchemy.org |
http://purl.org/NET/iand 
> Working on... 
> > > Pepys
> > <http://www.innovateer.com/products/pepys/>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rdfweb-dev mailing list
> > > rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > > wiki: http://rdfweb.org/topic/FoafProject
> > > http://rdfweb.org/mailman/listinfo/rdfweb-dev
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rdfweb-dev mailing list
> > rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> > wiki: http://rdfweb.org/topic/FoafProject
> > http://rdfweb.org/mailman/listinfo/rdfweb-dev
> 
> 




More information about the foaf-dev mailing list