Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Jun 14 09:42
    KMax closed #66
  • Jun 14 09:42
    KMax commented #66
  • Jun 14 09:29
    csarven commented #66
  • Jun 14 09:25
    KMax commented #66
  • Jun 14 09:19
    csarven commented #66
  • Jun 14 09:16
    KMax starred w3c/ldn
  • Jun 14 09:16
    KMax opened #66
  • May 28 09:46
    ertugerata starred w3c/ldn
  • May 14 21:37
    QuantumCloudDatabase starred w3c/ldn
  • Apr 17 19:39
    salifm starred w3c/ldn
  • Mar 05 16:44

    plehegar on master

    Boilerplate files (compare)

  • Mar 05 14:51
    AntoniaWild starred w3c/ldn
  • Feb 03 17:03
  • Dec 04 2018 11:49

    csarven on master

    Remove unused CSS/JS in ED Change spacing from 4 to 2 (compare)

  • Oct 05 2018 07:02
    taurenshaman starred w3c/ldn
  • May 22 2018 03:15
    BlackGlory starred w3c/ldn
  • May 11 2018 19:16
    js-choi starred w3c/ldn
  • Mar 21 2018 14:59
    luismendes070 starred w3c/ldn
  • Mar 04 2018 17:20
    Visgean starred w3c/ldn
Sandro Hawke
@sandhawke
(terrible UI design of gitter)
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@sandhawke Ack. Thanks.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@semanticfire Please have a look at csarven/ldn#21 and specifically https://github.com/csarven/ldn/issues/21#issuecomment-235992566 , and do chime-in.
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
ack
Is the ldn meetup on august 9 still a option ? need to book a airbnb, if we do I'll book something in boston for the night, otherwise I'll do something in Quincy
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
I think I'll be around until the 9th.
@semanticfire Are you currently implementing LDN or plan to?
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
Looking at it
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
My current application either use URI transfer for deref, or plain triples as message body
LDN looks interesting cause it has more context around it, although a push would be nice
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho

I just added inbox to my bot framework, so i run this command

pingbox.js <uri> <cert>

And it will queue a job for the bot to run

job
{ title: 'check inbox',
  uri: 'https://melvincarvalho.com/#me',
  cert: '/tmp/cert.pem' }
Running : check inbox
checking inbox for: https://melvincarvalho.com/#me /tmp/cert.pem
now I just need to write the consumer code
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
yay it works!
checking inbox for: https://melvin.databox.me/Public/inbox/ /tmp/cert.pem
[ 'https://melvin.databox.me/Public/inbox/ee7769',
  'https://melvin.databox.me/Public/inbox/714fc6',
  'https://melvin.databox.me/Public/inbox/6fab0f',
  'https://melvin.databox.me/Public/inbox/b8eae4',
...
So we have another consumer implementation now
Let me add some docs, then I'll add it to the spec
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Still very early prototype I've started to document at : https://github.com/solid-live/solidbot including a link to the LDN spec. When it's in better shape I'll add a PR to the LDN spec.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
That's great, thanks!
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
I've done quite a bit of testing of this framework, and I've processed around 1 million jobs so far without too much trouble.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@melvincarvalho Which ns are you using?
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
Right now I'm using Solid terms but I can add others
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
That's fine. If the discovery property is the only term for this spec, we'll probably add that under LDP ns. Right now that seems to be the case.
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
@csarven @rhiaro @sandhawke ( its OT, but I stay downtown Boston Tuesday next week would love to do a little meetup and discuss some LDN stuff )
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
@semanticfire awesome! I suggest inviting timbl and deiu ... when we met at TPAC I think we were all in the same problem space :)
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
@csarven let me know when is good timing to add this implementation to the spec, It's ready and working now at prototype level, but can do with more cleaning up & testing, so I'd like it to be the best it can be before referencing it. I know there's limited time to get the spec through the WG process so if you have hints on optimal timing, let me know! :)
Im going to write a processor for individual jobs too.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@melvincarvalho Anytime is fine if you think that it is comformant. We'll have tests sometime this month, so that'll be a bit more proper to check whether the implementations are okay or not. For the spec to go through, we need at least 2 implementations for the required sections in the spec. Right now we are adding the implementations to the list in an informatively. They'll eventually be removed in the final Recommendation, but linked to previous version (CR) which will have the links to the implementation.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
we have more than two implementations already, right?
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
For the moment, we are going with solid-terms:inbox or ldp:inbox (as per spec), but eventually we'll have one and stick to that.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
it's not hard to have both
coding wise
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Yes, we do, but it has to match the MUSTs in the spec.
So, we need to check carefully at some point.
At the moment, we are leaning on ldp:inbox. I think Solid implementations are open to that possibility if the spec is moves forward. Tim felt that it'd be good to put the discovery property under ldp, but solid could work too.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
no strong opinion here
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Great to hear that.
We don't have a strong opinion either but feel that ldp will get more mileage / less friction to use
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
it just needs some form of 'push' to a client for me then I really would love to implement it
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@semanticfire Push/poll are indeed useful, but the question that's still up in the air is whether that needs to be defined in this spec or simply refer to something that's out there.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
@semanticfire in solid we use websockets for that
it compliments LDN
but it's not the only way to do it
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
We certainly don't want to define our own. Neither do we have the expertise but also it just won't work into 'this' spec. It could be referred to some other note/spec.
Melvin Carvalho
@melvincarvalho
I have a few apps with push/pull working
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
This is not to imply that we don't want to discuss this. IMO, best way forward is to have (sub)section e.g., appendix or under considerations.
Bart van Leeuwen
@semanticfire
yeah i think not talking about it at all is not what you want
although I see that it is out of scope for the WG
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
The 'receiver' is acting as the storage for the notifications. The sender is notifying the receiver. We've just happened to separate the actor 'consumer' as its own. It is not necessarily the final recipient of the notification.