[foaf-protocols] WebID and WebFinger
melvincarvalho at gmail.com
Tue Aug 10 10:17:47 CEST 2010
On 10 August 2010 08:39, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 August 2010 20:19, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, I pointed this out to Blaine Cook, too. We've exchanged a few mails
> > the subject, on and off list.
> Blaine got right back to me offlist about it...
> Henry has also blogged about some of the
> > options. The W3C SWXG Social Incubator group also had a teleconference
> > Webfinger; most of the major players have been invited to speak and the
> > up rate is high. People like Chirs Messina have downloaded and viewed
> > source code as long ago as a year ago.
> > So im not sure why you think it's 'different universes'?
> Fair enough, I do seem to have missed a lot of interaction.
> > I think there's a quiet acceptance of WebID emmerging, with the attitude
> > sort of becoming ... 'Show us what you can do!'
> > Perhaps the wider question is, why have only about 1% of people who have
> > interest in the semantic web, so far got themselves a webid?
> Ah - now that is back in the "different universes" area. With the
> WebFinger folks looking at syntactical transformations from email
> addresses to URIs, potentially *everyone* with an email address will
> get URIs which identify themselves.
> Which raises the question around WebId of how best to deal with the
> likelihood of people having multiple WebIds (one per service given the
> current social net landscape), which seems ok semantically with the
> aid of owl:sameAs, but problematic in practice due to the lack of
> automatic discovery: a problem for both groups I reckon.
Sorry just noticed you mention owl:sameAs here :)
So I think we need things like semantic pingback here with sparql 1.1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the foaf-protocols