These are chat archives for csarven/ldn

21st
Apr 2017
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 08:00
Can I have authentication on the consumer side of inboxes as well ?
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 10:06
iow, I'm free to implement that however I want
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Apr 21 2017 10:06
Also https://www.w3.org/TR/ldn/#consumer "The consumer may include additional headers or content for the purposes of authentication or authorization."
Yes!
Not LDN's business
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 10:07
great, then I can continue with my implementation :)
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Apr 21 2017 10:08
Go go go
I'd like to see your implementation pass the tests and be listed in the tests summary
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 10:08
even if it is only consumer side and closed source ?
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Apr 21 2017 10:11
I don't think the spec itself demands it to be open source, but the WG most likely will not be in favour of it. It is not a requirement at this point to have more implementations either. So, we could in theory mention your implementation by string I suppose as there is nothing to link to. I'm not sure how useful that'd be in the end for anyone coming across the summary of implementations.
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 11:04
what is the deadline for test submissions ?
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Apr 21 2017 11:59
We're past that. What we have now qualified for PR, and okay for REC.
But, I'd like to see this as an ongoing thing regardless of the W3C process. The protocol should gain adoption over time.
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Apr 21 2017 12:00
okay, I see that