Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 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
  • Jan 04 02:47
    ewingson commented #221
  • Jan 01 22:15
    scenaristeur commented #221
  • Jan 01 22:15
    scenaristeur commented #221
  • Jan 01 22:10
    scenaristeur commented #221
  • Jan 01 20:05
    bourgeoa commented #221
  • Jan 01 16:48
    scenaristeur commented #221
  • Dec 09 2020 16:16
    TallTed commented #209
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
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
i think there's many more things that should be "formally defined"
Mitzi László
@Mitzi-Laszlo
It would be helpful to have this conversation in an issue so we can easily refer back to it. solid/specification#29.
Mitzi László
@Mitzi-Laszlo
@/all please have a look at solid/process#100
Ruben Verborgh
@RubenVerborgh
@timbl That is indeed the case for solid/solid-spec v0.8
However, we are writing a spec document with normative language, and there is a first PR for CORS, which defines it very precisely: solid/specification#13
Should cover your (a), and think also (b) but not fully sure what you mean
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
If solid-auth-client supported a user-defined header for authorization, such as X-Solid-Authentication, is this compatible with the spec?
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
@boulderwebdev in general, you can add whatever header you like. (tho there are CORS issues, you may need to modify the server)
@boulderwebdev what will you be using that header for?
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
@dmitrizagidulin oh I want to replace the standard authorization header's name because it is not compatible with nginx's basic auth module
Either the browser or nginx is writing over solid-auth-client's Authorization header while I talk to my server (right now I want to hide the server from public view by protecting it with http's basic authentication)
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
@boulderwebdev interesting. i’m not sure that’d be an easy lift.
you could turn off account creation, and have a blank front page, and the rest of the site is protected..
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
@dmitrizagidulin I was trying to protect both that and my SPA, but I'm having problems setting up a custom repo which has the changes I want
meaning, when I change the solid-auth-client to git+https://github.com/user/my-solid-auth.git, npm is getting into a tizzy about permissions issues
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
@boulderwebdev so, npm has a shorthand for that
if before your package.json was “solid-auth-client”: “^2.0.0”
you can switch it to
“solid-auth-client”: “user/my-solid-auth”
and it’ll work
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
@dmitrizagidulin hmm I'm still running into issues building my app. I put in solid/solid-auth-client, and that works correctly
but if you go ahead and clone the repository, delete the .git folder, create your own repo and set it up in the cloned folder, push it up to your new repo, then running npm i complains about building this repo
I can DM you a full stacktrace if you'd like
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
why not just put your cloned repo in the npm file directly? no need to delete .git etc