this is truly simple and yet powerful... my only concern is about how simple is to mantain that?
2014-01-30 Kingsley Idehen <[email protected]>: > On 1/30/14 5:10 PM, Alfredo Serafini wrote: > > uhm, I have a question about the scheme differences. > This could be used maybe to expose the "same" resource projecting only > public values (http) and value accessible to specific user on secure > connection? > > > Yes! > > Basically, I use the very pattern you outline above to control access to > some of the SPARQL endpoints I maintain i.e., only certain identities are > allowed to perform specific operations e.g., using the sponger instance to > crawl as part of follow-your-nose exploration that includes RDF > transformation etc.. > > Simple example I am the only one that can apply new data to my glossary to > terms doc [1], everyone else can read. In other cases, I assign privileges > to identities that are associated with a group or the result of SPARQL ASK > evaluations etc.. All of that happens as part of ACL configuration and (in > my case) mapping making the coreference a part of my configuration setup as > opposed to doing it via owl:sameAs relations. > > (https) > I mean: apart from the fact that we could have different formats, do you > think that a use case would actually be in exposing also data with limited > public access? > > > That's what I do :-) > > [1] http://bit.ly/1hFRCxh -- Glossary of Terms Doc (I am the only one > that can update that) > [2] > https://kingsley.idehen.net/about/html/www.adweek.com/news/technology/wow-hack-shows-twitter-handles-are-worth-big-bucks-155343-- > You will get an empty page (unless some identity associated with the > group that I allow to sponge get there before you). > > > Kingsley > > > Alfredo > > > 2014-01-30 Kingsley Idehen <[email protected]>: > >> On 1/30/14 1:09 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> >>> If not bad, is there any provision for allowing that an HTTPS URI that >>> only differs in the scheme part from HTTPS URI be identified as the same >>> resource? >>> >> >> http and https are fundamentally different resources, but you can link >> them together with owl : sameAs, I think ... >> >> >> Yes. >> >> You simply use an >> <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs><http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#sameAs>relation >> to indicate that a common entity is denoted [1] by the http: and >> https: scheme URIs in question. >> >> [1] http://bit.ly/1fqJ5yv -- Denotes Relation >> [2] http://bit.ly/Lf4TSg -- Referent >> [3] http://bit.ly/1bD2eZs -- Identifier. >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen >> Founder & CEO >> OpenLink Software >> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen >> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about >> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen >> >> >> >> > > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > Founder & CEO > OpenLink Software > Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen > Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about > LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > > > >
