[foaf-dev] [Fwd: [FriendFeed] Re: FOAF tweaks]
richard at cyganiak.de
Fri May 9 17:30:30 BST 2008
On 9 May 2008, at 15:27, Julian Bond wrote:
> Richard Cyganiak <richard at cyganiak.de> Fri, 9 May 2008 15:01:25
>> mbox_sha1sum is like an “identity fingerprint” that can be tracked
>> across the Web. Users will be surprised that sites publish such a
> Which is of course, exactly why it's useful. And no matter how many
> times I say "if you want to keep your identities separate, don't use
> the same identifier, people will still do it.
> Back To FriendFeed and sites like them. If it's not mbox_sha1sum, is
> there some other IFP that could be used?
Homepage. And in fact any account page: There's only one person who
can own any of those accounts mentioned in the FriendFeed FOAF. That's
why I think foaf:holdsAccount should be an IFP. Then you could do:
<foaf.rdf#cygri> foaf:holdsAccount <http://twitter.com/cygri> .
<foaf.rdf#cygri> foaf:holdsAccount <http://flickr.com/photos/cygri> .
<foaf.rdf#cygri> foaf:holdsAccount <http://last.fm/user/cygri> .
And if you know me through any of those public social networks, you
(To anticipate the inevitable complaint that an online account is not
the same as the profile page of that account: I think for the purposes
of FOAF they can and should be treated as the same, because that's
> If say, they were an OpenID consumer, and that was published in the
> foaf, and further the user used the same OpenID for different
> personas across two websites, we'd be back to the same problem
> again, wouldn't we? Isn't this an argument against IFPs and smushing
> in general?
> Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907
> Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412
> Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?
> Do Not Expose To Heat
> foaf-dev mailing list
> foaf-dev at lists.foaf-project.org
More information about the foaf-dev