[foaf-protocols] Lots of confusions ...

Melvin Carvalho melvincarvalho at gmail.com
Tue May 18 18:58:51 CEST 2010


2010/5/18 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen at openlinksw.com>

> Story Henry wrote:
>
>> On 18 May 2010, at 17:26, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Story Henry wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 18 May 2010, at 15:29, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You don't know what's happening here, do you Mr Jones.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are a few bugs on the foaf.me mailing list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Apologies for this.  There was an attempt made to refactor the library,
>>>>> but
>>>>> it seems some bugs were introduced, that have not yet been patched.  I
>>>>> didnt
>>>>> actually program this piece, but will attempt to work out what's going
>>>>> wrong, or see if I can roll back to the previous version of the
>>>>> library,
>>>>> which was definitely stable.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> This could be related to the bug I found last year that allowed one with
>>>> Tabulator to edit other people's foaf graphs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> How can you edit someone else's FOAF graphs if FOAF+SSL based ACLs are
>>> functional?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nobody is arguing that you could if things worked properly. We are
>> speaking of bugs here.
>>
>> These are the types of bugs many people moving from tabular databases and
>> indeed any other kind of closed world programming environment to RDF will
>> make. This was my point in "Are OO Languages Autistic"
>> http://blogs.sun.com/bblfish/entry/are_oo_languages_autistic
>>
>> We have all been forced as programmers into bad thinking habits. So we
>> should be aware of our own mistakes, and help people joining the community
>> to avoid making them too. This will be a difficult educational task.
>>
>>
>
> Yes, but I am more concerned about the Tabulator edit aspect of this.  How
> does Tabulator enable to edit data in a space to which you don't have
> privileges? I haven't looked at Tabulator for a long time now, but I am
> somewhat confused re. this turn of events.
>

Tabulator can edit any file that

1) Sends the requisite MS-Author-Via: SPARQL
2) Accepts an HTTP PUT with a SPARQL UPDATE

I guess (1) should imply (2)

I'm not sure we ever formally decided a rule to add foaf+ssl to the mix, but
simplest is that if you're authenticated as the webid that 'owns' a
'protected' document. you should be allowed to edit?


>  Henry
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen       President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web:
> http://www.openlinksw.com
> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/attachments/20100518/e500bdea/attachment-0001.htm 


More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list