OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xri message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [xri] More on Special XRI TC Telecon 1PM PT Wednesday 2007-05-09


For what its worth, I was trying to say basically the same thing in a phone
call with some of you recently - the idea is that we don't want to design a
system where I have to ask permission to talk about you. 

Beyond the fact that it breaks reputation systems, it also suffers from
being extremely brittle - what happens if I change my mind about other
people "talking about me"? What happens if I change INames? What happens if
I am extremely popular and 10,000 people want to talk about me? 

My point is that if you want to build in a permission  layer, fine, but to
do it in the syntax and core resolution mechanisms seems scary to me, and
fraught with many issues. 

	-Gabe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 12:29 AM
> To: 'Barnhill, William'; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri] More on Special XRI TC Telecon 1PM PT Wednesday 2007-
> 05-09
> 
> Bill,
> 
> Thanks very much for posting your views. I think you make a very important
> point that I haven't heard expressed by the other editors. As you sum it
> up:
> 
> "I think a data authority needs to be able to make statements about other
> data authorities without their permission, otherwise any reputation or
> review system goes out the window, in my opinion. There are ways around
> that, but I'm not sure they'd work well."
> 
> I think this means that you would argue that the cross-resolution proposal
> that appears on
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/EqualsAtSocialVulnerability should
> be
> an optional feature of an XRI resolver, not a required feature.
> 
> This is a subject I'd like to discuss further on the TC telecon tomorrow
> (under #3 on the agenda I just sent out). I hope you'll be able to make
> it.
> 
> =Drummond
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barnhill, William [mailto:barnhill_william@bah.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 1:16 PM
> To: Drummond Reed; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri] More on Special XRI TC Telecon 1PM PT Wednesday
> 2007-05-09
> 
> Unfortunately I will be unable to make the call it looks like, but I do
> have some comments:
> 
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/DirectConcatenation :
> - For $ip, how would ipv6 be represented
> - In the weeds, but it would be nice if PTR syntax was supported by
> $DNS. If not, then vendors can come up with a method as they need to.
> - Wouldn't #11's mailto:.. Need to be in an xref?
> 
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/EqualsAtSocialVulnerability:
> 
> Social Vulnerability of =/@ Concatenation:
> -Rather than "Therefore the use of an =name or @name in the context of
> another =name or @name implies a direct relationship between these
> resources that may or may not exist in reality", I view it as "Therefore
> the use of an =nameA or @nameA in the context of another =nameB or
> @nameB implies that the data authority for =nameB or @nameB is making a
> statement about =nameA or @nameA that may or may not be true, and may or
> may not be agreed upon by the data authority for =nameA or @nameA."
> 
> Confusion of @ Name Concatentation with Email Address Syntax:
> Yes, this will be a problem. Not sure it's a technical problem though,
> but one of perception.
> 
> It sounds like options 1-8 all disallow authority A making statements
> about authority B (Note I'm using 'about' not 'for'). Not sure if any of
> them would allow A to make statements about B if A used the long version
> of xref sytnax or not.  I think when we start saying that data for which
> A is an authority is governed by certain restrictions it starts sliding
> the slope of special cases. I can put on my website that Mr. 1234 is an
> 3-eyed sloth. Doesn't mean that he is, and if I claim that information
> is true and it's not that should affect the reputation associated with
> my identity. If what I say about him falls under certain guidelines it
> will be actionable as libel.  Either way the issue is a social or legal
> one, not technical.
> 
> I think a data authority needs to be able to make statements about other
> data authorities without their permission, otherwise any reputation or
> review system goes out the window, in my opinion. There are ways around
> that, but I'm not sure they'd work well.
> 
> 
> --
> William Barnhill                    Phone: (315) 491-6765
> Associate                           Email: barnhill_william@bah.com
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton             i-name: =Bill.Barnhill
> "Delivering results that endure"
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 5:17 AM
> To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xri] More on Special XRI TC Telecon 1PM PT Wednesday
> 2007-05-09
> 
> Two new wiki pages have been posted to provide the background for the
> issues to be discussed on the special XRI TC telecon Wednesday at 1PM PT
> (see telecon info below):
> 
> 	http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/DirectConcatenation
> 
> 
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriCd02/EqualsAtSocialVulnerability
> 
> The first one describes direct concatenation syntax, parse trees, and
> resolution rules. The second one describes the social vulnerability
> problem of =/@ concatenation and a slate of proposed solutions.
> 
> Please read them over before the call if you are able.
> 
> =Drummond
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:46 PM
> To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xri] Special XRI TC Telecon 1PM PT Wednesday 2007-05-09
> 
> XRI TC Members:
> 
> As the XRI Syntax editors try to close the last key issues remaining
> before producing XRI Syntax 2.1, we will be holding a special telecon
> open to all members of the TC this Wednesday at 1PM Pacific time. This
> call will be in addition to our normal call on Thursdays at 10AM PT.
> 
> We will send out an additional email with an agenda and wiki links
> before the telecon, but we want to invite all TC members to put in on
> their calendars.
> 
> We will use the standard TC telecon number (thanks to NeuStar for
> hosting
> this):
> 
> TO ACCESS THE AUDIO CONFERENCE:
>     Dial In Number: 571-434-5750
>     Conference ID: 5474
> 
> =Drummond



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]