Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • May 12 19:50
    RubenVerborgh synchronize #234
  • May 12 19:50

    RubenVerborgh on acronym

    Correct LD URL. Co-authored-by… (compare)

  • May 12 19:50
    RubenVerborgh commented #234
  • May 12 19:36
    RubenVerborgh review_requested #234
  • May 12 19:36
    RubenVerborgh review_requested #234
  • May 12 19:36
    RubenVerborgh opened #234
  • May 12 19:36

    RubenVerborgh on acronym

    Remove obsolete acronym expansi… (compare)

  • Mar 23 02:19
    ianconsolata opened #233
  • Feb 25 16:26
    jeff-zucker commented #232
  • Feb 25 08:17
    WhyINeedToFillUsername commented #232
  • Feb 25 01:40
    jeff-zucker commented #232
  • Feb 25 01:39
    jeff-zucker commented #232
  • Feb 25 01:39
    jeff-zucker commented #232
  • Feb 24 19:19
    WhyINeedToFillUsername opened #232
  • Feb 05 14:54
    csarven transferred #4
  • Jan 14 13:58

    RubenVerborgh on websockets-version-format

    (compare)

  • Jan 14 13:58

    RubenVerborgh on master

    Remove slash from version numbe… Drop alpha from version number.… Replace warning by explanation.… and 1 more (compare)

  • Jan 14 13:58
    RubenVerborgh closed #230
  • Jan 14 13:58
    RubenVerborgh closed #221
  • Jan 13 20:37
    WhyINeedToFillUsername commented #230
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@kjetilk I love your CV!!! :) Reminds me of another CV.. with different content.
Oh my that's super old.. still using the http://linked-research.270a.info links
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
I should update the subdomain entries.. moved to a new server and didn't bother to setup the old redirects
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
what is the scope of the Solid spec?
seems like it takes a list of orthogonal specifications (HTTP, LDP, auth, CORS) and slaps MUST on them
which does not make a specification in itself
Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One, 5.1. Orthogonal Specifications
https://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#orthogonal-specs

Identification, interaction, and representation are orthogonal concepts, meaning that technologies used for identification, interaction, and representation may evolve independently. For instance:

  • Resources are identified with URIs. URIs can be published without building any representations of the resource or determining whether any representations are available.
  • A generic URI syntax allows agents to function in many cases without knowing specifics of URI schemes.
  • In many cases one may change the representation of a resource without disrupting references to the resource (for example, by using content negotiation).

When two specifications are orthogonal, one may change one without requiring changes to the other, even if one has dependencies on the other. For example, although the HTTP specification depends on the URI specification, the two may evolve independently. This orthogonality increases the flexibility and robustness of the Web. For example, one may refer by URI to an image without knowing anything about the format chosen to represent the image. This has facilitated the introduction of image formats such as PNG and SVG without disrupting existing references to image resources.

Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
@csarven eh, yeah, I kinda sought inspiration somewhere :-)
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
Catching up on this conversation. I am also -1 on renaming solid/specification. I agree with @RubenVerborgh that the solid/specification repository needs to have a clean break from the previous documents, and that linking to them, as is currently the case, is sufficient
Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
@namedgraph_twitter yeah, so "The Spec" is a bit misleading, it is a bunch of orthogonal specifications, and documentation that pulls it into a whole
Michiel de Jong
@michielbdejong
Ok well, it was worth a try :)
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@namedgraph_twitter Putting the repo names / paths aside, the entry document (so to speak) is called "The Solid Ecosystem" (TSE) https://solid.github.io/specification/
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Further, TSE doesn't solely slap a MUST. It is intended to navigate around the existing specs and mention specific conformance criteria where needed - ideally without breaking conformance with existing specs.
Mitzi László
@Mitzi-Laszlo

what is the scope of the Solid spec? good question @namedgraph_twitter

@/all thoughts?

here's my two cents...
The aim of the Solid specification is to provide the necessary information for data storage providers and application providers to build in such a way that their users can switch between app providers and data storage providers and take the data generated along without interruption of service.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Not sure about "without interruption" :) But I get your point.
Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
Yeah, I think that's a good statement, @Mitzi-Laszlo !
As for the scope, the scope of Solid is surely as wide open as the Web itself?
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
that is not a specification then. more like product documentation?
which probably has another format
Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
there are both specifications and product documentation, yes
there are lots of normative things
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
like what?
Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
@namedgraph_twitter pretty much every section will point to a normative specification...
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
but how does it fit among them?
if it's not orthogonal to them, something is not right
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
(aside: @kjetilk , updated subdomains.. so, linked-research.270a.info stuff will load from dokie.li .. but feel free to change the URLs any way.)
Kjetil Kjernsmo
@kjetilk
@csarven great
@namedgraph_twitter The Solid Ecosystem is more documentation, bringing together orthogonal specifications
Ruben Verborgh
@RubenVerborgh

@namedgraph_twitter

if it's not orthogonal to them, something is not right

If that were true, then LDP could never have existed, because all LDP does is contrain HTTP to handle RDF. That is, it takes the HTTP spec, prescribes specific usage of certain methods and headers, and mandates Turtle representations for some things.

"something is not right" is not supported by the W3C document you linked to, which states that:

When two specifications are orthogonal…

So there is no requirement for specs to be orthogonal.

In this case, we need to keep in mind that Solid = LDP + WAC + WebID-OIDC (I am grossly simplifying here)
so this is exactly what the Solid spec entry document will say
"to do Solid, use LDP, WAC, and WebID-TLS together in this manner"
that's the simple truth
the complex truth is something along the lines of
Solid = HTTP + URL + RDF + LDP + WAC + WebID-TLS + WebID-OIDC + CORS + SHACL + Footprints + some more
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
fair enough
but is that a "specification" still?
Ruben Verborgh
@RubenVerborgh
and that some of these technologies, such as WAC, WebID-TLS, WebID-OIDC, Footprints still need their own specification document
and those specifications will be orthogonal
@namedgraph_twitter It is a specification by all means.
Have a look at solid/specification#13
it doesn't just say "use CORS"
it says "write your server in this very specific manner following this existing spec"
and CORS is just an easy one, where we're more or less saying "just use it", except that it takes multiple paragraphs for something like CORS already
Tim Berners-Lee
@timbl
The current specification says “cors is very big thing getting in your way— use it right” but does not formally define the solid protocol unless I have missed it
The spec needs to (a) define the protocol and (b) describe the invariant properties of the system when the protocol is followed