The fields Knowledge representation paradigm, Engineering methodology, Created with, Accrual method, Accrual periodicity... are empty
Community
Notes
Ontology for Certificates and crypto stuff.
This is in development.
Some other ontologies to look at:
* http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/crypto
+ has cwm builtins: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/Trust
- a bit old perhaps. It imports daml+oil
- would help to be more completely specified
- uses literals as subjects a little liberally, which makes this a
bit difficult to work with frameworks that don't permit this
* http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/
- limited very much to PGP (though on can map PGP to X509)
- a little coarse grained, mixes up the PGP certificate with the PGP
public key
*
Todo:
- add some classes and relations for DSA
- should this all be in one file? Or should this be cut up a little? Say one file for the general CERT ontology, and then files for RSA, DSA, PGP, etc... Or perhaps it does not really matter?
- expand more on the certification side of things
- verify this by security experts
- owl2 has some constructs for combined inverse functional properties.
This may be useful to use in defining an RSA key which is identified
by two numbers.
- also create html version of the spec by using this as a template.
- should comments such as this be in html?
, Ontology for Certificates and crypto stuff.
This is in development.
Some other ontologies to look at:
* http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/crypto
+ has cwm builtins: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/Trust
- a bit old perhaps. It imports daml+oil
- would help to be more completely specified
- uses literals as subjects a little liberally, which makes this a
bit difficult to work with frameworks that don't permit this
* http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/
- limited very much to PGP (though on can map PGP to X509)
- a little coarse grained, mixes up the PGP certificate with the PGP
public key
*
Todo:
- add some classes and relations for DSA
- should this all be in one file? Or should this be cut up a little? Say one file for the general CERT ontology, and then files for RSA, DSA, PGP, etc... Or perhaps it does not really matter?
- expand more on the certification side of things
- verify this by security experts
- owl2 has some constructs for combined inverse functional properties.
This may be useful to use in defining an RSA key which is identified
by two numbers.
- also create html version of the spec by using this as a template.
- should comments such as this be in html?
