Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Mar 18 10:04
    RubenVerborgh review_requested #220
  • Mar 18 10:03
    RubenVerborgh synchronize #220
  • Mar 18 10:03

    RubenVerborgh on websockets-version

    Simplified version string. (compare)

  • Mar 18 08:32
    csarven commented #220
  • Mar 18 08:14
    csarven commented #220
  • Mar 17 22:26
    RubenVerborgh commented #220
  • Mar 17 20:25
    RubenVerborgh review_requested #220
  • Mar 17 20:25
    RubenVerborgh review_requested #220
  • Mar 17 20:25
    RubenVerborgh labeled #220
  • Mar 17 20:25
    RubenVerborgh opened #220
  • Mar 17 20:24

    RubenVerborgh on websockets-version

    Indicate draft status and versi… Order instructions chronologica… Let clients indicate the protoc… and 3 more (compare)

  • Mar 16 12:57
    melvincarvalho commented #216
  • Mar 16 09:13
    CxRes commented #218
  • Mar 16 07:36
    Ryuno-Ki commented #218
  • Mar 16 02:52
    CxRes edited #218
  • Mar 16 02:51
    CxRes commented #218
  • Mar 13 01:16
    MasterJames commented #218
  • Mar 13 01:16
    MasterJames commented #218
  • Mar 13 01:15
    MasterJames commented #218
  • Mar 13 01:14
    MasterJames commented #218
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
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
for example, if Bob clones that repo, he can just put ‘bob/solid-auth-client’ in the package json
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
ohhh that's what I mean
I was telling you my steps for creating my-user/my-solid-auth
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
oh i see.
still tho, you can just fork and rename the repo on github
there’s almost never a need to delete .git
and, sure, you can dm me the error
boulderwebdev
@boulderwebdev
:thumbsup: that's way easier
A_A
@Otto-AA
Hey there, I would like to continue working on two javascript libraries for working with acl permissions but would need some clarification of the spec:
Can multiple acl:accessTo values be used in the same document and/or authorization? (solid/web-access-control-spec#68)
Does the value of acl:defaultchange its meaning? (solid/web-access-control-spec#63)
Michiel de Jong
@michielbdejong
@Otto-AA they can live alongside each other and do not influence each other
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
@Otto-AA this is the authoritative version of the W3C ACL ontology: https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl
definitely can use multiple acl:accessTo, it's RDF :)
A_A
@Otto-AA
@michielbdejong I am not sure if I expressed myself clear enough. The questions I raised are two independent questions and not related to each other. Or did I misunderstood your answer?
@namedgraph_twitter Thanks for linking me this version. From what the wiki says it is possible to use multiple acl:accessTo's too. Even though the solid-spec explicitly states that it differs from the wiki version, I think it is safe to go with this definition.
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
@namedgraph_twitter @Otto-AA
re authoritative version of the W3C ontology - that is not quite correct. Solid uses its own specification, the authoritative spec being https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec
not the wiki
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
@dmitrizagidulin and that's exactly the problem
it hijacks the same namespace
and adds its own semantics
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
specs... aren't kept on a Wiki. that is not a document or tool that makes it possible to achieve consensus, version the spec, etc. And that Wiki is not attached to any working group or other standards body. The Solid project has no jurisdiction over it
I think the solid's WAC spec is very clear that this is a solid-specific version of the spec
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
that's there to spec about an ontology? http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl is it's own spec
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
I'm not sure how that's hijacking it
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
and it's hosted by the W3C
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
great. who has write access to it?
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
i don't know, probably TimBL
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
maybe. But TimBL has expressed preference for continuing the spec work on the github repo instead, not on the wiki
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
stuff like acl:trustedApp is not even in the ontology file
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
yeah, I agree, that's not good. it needs to be housed somewhere..
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
so the spec can talk about its usage in Solid, but an OWL ontology is a spec of its own
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
oh yeah, now I remember, the discussion over at solid/web-access-control-spec#51
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
so all the properties Solid creates should go into its own namespace
i've raised this multiple times
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
agreed, yeah.
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
the http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl document is fine as it is
because it's more general than Solid
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
so, that issue #51 is where things stand (open and pending, at the moment), seems like.
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
i guess
it's not a big change really, to introduce a namespace
but nobody seems to care
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
yeah, we've been very slow about updating vocabs/ontologies
I suspect part of it has to do with - who has write access to those, and the general governance process, has been unclear
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
the point of OWL ontologies is that they are components and import each other
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
now that governance has been formalized, Panels/workgroups assigned, etc, I think you'll see progress on that front
Martynas Jusevicius
@namedgraph_twitter
and not piling all semi-related terms onto the same namespace URI
Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
agree, yeah