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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xdi message

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


Subject: Minutes: XDI TC Telecon Thursday 1:00-2:00PM PT 2011-06-16


Following are the minutes of the unofficial telecon of the XDI TC at:

Date:  Thursday, 16 June 2011 USA
Time:  1:00PM - 2:00PM Pacific Time (20:00-21:30 UTC)

ATTENDANCE

Mike Schwartz
Bill Barnhill
Giovanni Bartolomeo
Markus Sabadello
Drummond Reed 
Joseph Boyle


THE IDEARPAD LINK FOR TODAY IS:
     http://xdi.idearpad.org/32


1) GIOVANNI UPDATE

Giovanni reported on the presentation of his paper at the European Semantic Web conference. He also had a poster about a way of integrating XDI within the Linked Data project.

The first issue was explaining that XRIs as abstract identifiers can be bound to concrete URIs, so they can be compatible. We can also accommodate URIs as cross-references. So there is no incompatability.

Giovanni talked to Prof. Chris Bizer, Free University of Berlin, inventor of DBPedia, who started the Linked Data project in 2005. The Linked Data project now has over 18 billion triples (!)

Giovanni talked to him both about XDI graph addressability and also the owl:sameAs problem. In particular, XDI can help address the issue of using the same URI in different contexts (i.e., different RDF graphs).

He also had discussions about whether RDF reification can be used to do the same thing as XDI graph addressability. Giovanni pointed out that while in theory it is possible, it requires 5X the number of URIs, and is computationally much more expensive.

Giovanni also showed the OxGraph demo. The perception of the audience was that the use of symbols was hard to understand vs. the mnemonic terms used by RDF/OWL.

In conclusion, we now have a way to translate XRIs and XDI documents into URIs and RDF documents that is compatible with Linked Data. The challenge is to communicate the advantages clearly. Giovanni believes the key advantage is provenance, i.e., being able to express extend the XDI concept of context to a URI.

Bill summarized the problem this way: in RDF, URI namespace are independent of RDF graphs, while in XDI, the namespace is directly related to each XDI graph. Currently the solution for adding this type of context in RDF is Named Graphs, however this requires going to a quad instead of a triple, and the actual triple is still not itself contextualized. So Giovanni's suggestion is to use multi subsegmented identifiers such as XRIs to merge the URI name of the graph with the URI of the subject (or also predicate) of each triple so that contextualization becomes built into the RDF graph itself, as it happens in XDI documents.

Bill: A page that may provide some extra information related to this is...
http://www.w3.org/wiki/HttpUrisAreExpensive


2) MOVING BACK TO SEMANTIC $WORDS INSTEAD OF SYMBOLS

As the feedback Giovanni received shows, there is a growing sense that the value of using pure symbols for the XDI metagraph relationships is offset by the readability of semantic $words. Even Drummond, who led the charge towards adopting symbols after the suggestion from Eve Maler, is leaning back in the other direction.

# DRUMMOND to investigate moving back to $words instead symbols and make a proposal.


3) OPENXDI STATUS REPORT

Mike reported that messaging is done and basic link contracts is done. Authentication is the next step. The project is leaning toward's Bill's suggestion of implementing PKI first. The main reason is that it is the most granular. Initially the keys will be on the server, but stronger key management can be added at any time. SAML and OAuth can be added afterwards.

He said that 6/30 will be the first official 0.0 build. Mike then went over the upcoming development schedule, including adding Messaging to OxGraph, and completing link contracts.


4) UPDATED LINK CONTRACT PATTERN

Mike asked for some additional features to be demonstrated in the  link contract pattern. Drummond included them in the latest version of  the XDI Graph Patterns doc:

  http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/42562/xdi-graph-patterns-2011-06-15.pdf

Mike  would also like examples of $not$xxx permissions, i.e., deny instead of  allow. Drummond has not had time to illustrate this yet.


5) XDI 1.0 DICTIONARY

The following wiki page was been refactored per our discussion a few weeks ago:

  http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/XdiOneSpecs

Of these specs, Mike would like to make progress fastest on the  Dictionary spec. The proposal is to start a wiki page, XdiOneDictionary,  which would use either XDI statement format or JSON format to express  the initial XDI dictionary.

# DRUMMOND to create this page.

Bill added the following index of what he's creating from DITA and plans to post by this weekend.

Concept: An XDI Message definition
Concept: Definition of a trustable XDI message
Concept: Characteristics of a trustable XDI message
Concept: Parts of an XDI Message
Concept: XDI Message exchange patterns
Concept: Definition of data interchange
Task: Creating an XDI Message
Task: Creating a Trustable XDI Message
Concept: Definition of a Link Contract
Concept: Link Contract example
Concept:: Connection-less XDI Messaging
Concept: Connection-oriented XDI Messaging
Task: Establishing an untrusted XDI Connection
Task: Upgrading an untrusted XDI Connection to be Trusted
Task: Pt. 1 of upgrading to trusted: authentication (PKI first, OAUTH to come later)
Task: Closing an XDI Connection
Task: Negotiating a new Link Contract
Task: Verifying an XDI Connection upgrade request
Concept: The XDI core operations
Concept: XDI Get Operation
Concept: XDI Set Operation
Concept: XDI Modify operation
Concept: XDI Delete operation
Concept: XDI Subscribe operation, for pub-sub
Concept: XDI Take operation, for knowledge spaces (L-Spaces)
Concept: XDI Put operation, for knowledge spaces (L-spaces)
Concept: Definition of an XDI Dictionary
Concept: The prime XDI Dictionary
Concept: Querying the prime XDI Dictionary
Concept: Creating your own dictionary
Task: Create your own dictionary
Concept: The locations of dictionaries applicable to an XRI
Task: Constructing the addresses of possible dictionaries
Concept: Basic XDI types in the prime dictionary
Concept: The core XDI relation types
Concept: XDI relation type hierarchy
Concept: XDI equivalence 
Concept: XDI composition
Concept: XDI qualities
Concept: The XDI Constructors for the core relation types
Concept: XDI Constructor example
Concept: $msg
Concept: $json
Concept: $xml
Concept: $pki 

# BILL to post his dictionary proposal document.


6) BILL'S QUESTIONS

We agreed that the list of questions Bill sent to the list should be revisited after we decide about the metagraph symbols issue. For reference, Bill's message is at:

   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201105/msg00001.html

For convenience, and notetaking, these questions are:
Q1:At different times we've used a different dollar word to indicate that something is an instance of something else, an 'is-a' relationship. I believe $ at the end of the subject with a * predicate is currently used to represent the inverse of is-a, is that correct? By that I mean that the sentence "Bob's ball 1 is an instance of an Example org ball" is stated by @example+ball$/*/=bob+ball$1. Does this match everyone's view of consensus? If that's not currently accepted way then what is would be the accepted XDI statement?
 
Q2: If I'm Bob let's say I'm the data authority for Bob's ball 1, but I may or may not be the authority for @example+ball. Let's assume I'm not. Then what is the currently accepted way to state @example+ball$/*/=bob+ball$1 using an inverse so the XDI statement is under =bob? Is it =bob+ball$1/$!/@example+ball ?
 
These patterns are not new but restatements of what I've been following on the mailing list, discussions and http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/XdiDictionaryPatterns?action=info.
 
The individual patterns are listed below:
.. The predicate * means that the object is a part of the whole that is the subject (see below for some questions on use of *)
.. An predicate of $! means the subject is an instance of the object: {s}/$!/{o}
.. An ending $ in a subject means the subject is a type. {s}$ <==> {s}/$!/$
.. There is no specific predicate that is the inverse of $!, but the inverse can be specified through the rule {s}/$!/{o} <==> {o}$/*/{s}
.. Curly braces are usable within an XDI XRI and represent a variable
 
Is there anyone who has a different view?
 
Also, as I understand it in XRI the * character represents re-assignable delegation.  Can we use * as a segment by itself like this without causing conformant XRI parsers problems? Also is the predicate * above actually * or **?
 
Finally, what are the thoughts on the following new dollar words to address relationships where the subject is in a specific type of context of the object:
 
{s}/$what/{o} - A more readable single predicate form of {s}/$!/{o}, puts subject in type context of object
 
{s}/$when/{o} - Puts subject within the temporal context of object. Object would most likely be a time, time range, etc. but could also be something other than a time or time range which would mean the subject had the same temporal context (i.e. lifetime) of the object.
 
{s}/$where/{o} - Same as $when, except for geographic location rather than temporal
 
{s}/$who/{o} - Puts subject within context of an agent. This could mean ownership, the actor if subject is an event, or just that subject is associated with the agent in some way
 
{s}/$why/{o} - Puts the subject, which must be an XDI statement or graph, in the context of an object that is a justification for the subject (not necessarily the only justification).
 
The $why one needs an example and I am working on it. Will post to wiki.

6) NEXT CALL

The next call is next week at the regular time. Agreed subjects:


------------
ONGOING ISSUES LIST

Each of these is a candidate for the agenda for future calls.

* TRANSACTIONAL INTEGRITY FOR XDI (added 2011-03-24)

Since  versioning, as one example, involves multiple transactions that must be  commited as a group, we will need to address transactional integrity.  Specifically, we need to define how this will be handled at the protocol  level, vs. the implementation level.

* PROPOSED CONSTRUCTS/OPERATORS FOR XDI

Discuss the following wiki page originally posted by Giovanni:

  http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/XdiNewFoundation

* DICTIONARY STRUCTURE

Mike would like an example of the PDX dictionary as soon as we can do it.

*   EQUIVALENCE SEMANTICS

Close on whether we need an additional $ word that is the equivalent
of Higgins Personal Data Model (PDM)  semantics   of h:correlation,
which is not as strong as $is.

      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201006/msg00036.html

* COOL URIS

Continue previous discussion about the use of standard RDF URIs in XDI:

  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201006/msg00023.html














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