Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Nov 25 11:43

    csarven on 2022-11-23

    (compare)

  • Nov 25 11:43

    csarven on main

    Add 2022-11-23 agenda and minut… (compare)

  • Nov 25 11:43
    csarven closed #483
  • Nov 25 11:42

    csarven on 2022-11-23

    Apply suggestions from code rev… (compare)

  • Nov 25 11:42
    csarven synchronize #483
  • Nov 23 16:42
    csarven synchronize #483
  • Nov 23 16:42

    csarven on 2022-11-23

    Corrections to minutes (compare)

  • Nov 23 15:11
    csarven synchronize #483
  • Nov 23 15:11

    csarven on 2022-11-23

    Update 2022-11-23 minutes (compare)

  • Nov 23 12:15
    csarven labeled #483
  • Nov 23 12:15
    csarven assigned #483
  • Nov 23 12:15
    csarven opened #483
  • Nov 23 12:15

    csarven on 2022-11-23

    Add 2022-11-23 agenda and minut… (compare)

  • Nov 18 13:48
    csarven edited #462
  • Nov 17 18:13

    csarven on main

    Use updated requirement level c… (compare)

  • Nov 17 17:57

    csarven on main

    Use updated requirement level c… (compare)

  • Nov 17 17:48

    csarven on use-solid-protocol-classes-of-products

    (compare)

  • Nov 17 17:48

    csarven on main

    Use #Server #Client for spec:re… (compare)

  • Nov 17 17:48
    csarven closed #479
  • Nov 17 17:47
    csarven closed #282
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@matthieubosquet What's a Pod? What's ownership?
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
That’s exactly @matthieubosquet’s point: WAC defines an owner property. But the ACP vocabulary is separate from WAC: should it define its own owner property? Or is there a way to define it more generally in Solid?
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Is acl:owner on pim:Storage equivalent/different from ACP's podOwner? But sure, we could have an alternative I suppose. If a spec requires it, sure..
acl:owner has range Agent. What's podOwner's domain/range?
probably mentioned in the issue comments I linked above... but if the property is on say Storage, I think it is reasonable to interpret that as the 'owner' of the 'pod'.
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn

Is acl:owner on pim:Storage equivalent/different from ACP's podOwner?

The difference is that acl:owner is part of the WAC domain, which isn’t relevant for non-WAC authZ mechanisms

Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
What do you mean by WAC domain?
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
the ACL vocabulary is WAC
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
<http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#owner> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property> .
<http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#owner> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment> "The person or other agent which owns this.\n    For example, the owner of a file in a filesystem.\n    There is a sense of right to control.   Typically defaults to the agent who craeted\n    something but can be changed." .
<http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#owner> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "owner"@en .
<http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#owner> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent> .
is the the namespace that's of concern?
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
yes
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
so I don't understand the question then.. do you want a property for ACP (which you've already put through under w3.org..)
Want a more generic eg. solid:owner / solid:podOwner etc?
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn
The question is: does every authZ mechanism define their own owner property, or can one be added to the solid namespace and thereby be more generally applicable?
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
I don't know about every.. but WAC doesn't require it at the moment, as you know. There are some things that's hinting at using acl:owner (or something similar from what I've gathered) but that's not specified. I do think it is reasonable to put it under solid/terms.
Aside: This conversation makes me think of WAC-Allow's parameters and access modes.
Aaron Coburn
@acoburn

Aside: This conversation makes me think of WAC-Allow's parameters and access modes.

completely agree

Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
So, if solid:owner is equivalentProperty acl:owner that'd be okay? :) IMO, for "podOwner" to be sensible, domain probably needs to be a "Pod". This is where I was going with using acl:owner on pim:Storage.
Justin Bingham
@justinwb

The question is: does every authZ mechanism define their own owner property, or can one be added to the solid namespace and thereby be more generally applicable?

should be under solid imo

Dmitri Zagidulin
@dmitrizagidulin
any chance i can convince ya’ll to use ‘controller’ instead of ‘owner’?
(so that we can match the w3c community terminology)
Matthieu Bosquet
@matthieubosquet
@dmitrizagidulin could you link to relevant documentatoin on the w3c terminology?
Matthieu Bosquet
@matthieubosquet
+1 for the owner/controller property being under solid with domain solid:Pod
Sorry if the question has already been answered, but is there or should we create a class and predicate for WebIDs?
Something like solid:webId & solid:WebID.
Since really agents in the solid context are identified by a WebID and a WebID really is just a URI identifying an Agent.
I'm wondering if solid:WebID would not be a better fit as range of an owner property or as domain of solid:oidcIssuer instead of a vcard:Agent which might have a solid:webId or not.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven

@matthieubosquet If of interest: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/153#issuecomment-616464435 , https://gitter.im/solid/chat?at=59f890fce44c43700a9dc81f or see links in https://github.com/solid/contacts-pane/issues/18#issuecomment-725963009 .

As long as the needs are well documented and specs are referring to them, all fine. Not sure about a webid Class but can probably get more out of a property.

I'm not opposed to "podOwner" property or "Pod" class -- and which namespace is to throw it under is the least of concerns IMO -- but I'd like to hear more from people about what they think/expect with the differences are with root container (pim:Storage) or maybe even server origin or root URI path..

re "controller" or "owner" etc .. see links above. Plenty of existing discussion in chats/issues.. not worth repeating here unless there is some new information. tl;dr: both are fine as synonyms but can obviously differ in their meaning and purpose. Don't forget to throw in "creator" or "admin" or "authority" for fun and profit.

Matthias Evering
@ewingson
Don't forget to throw in "creator" or "admin" or "authority" for fun and profit.
I like this thought. it made me smile...
@csarven do you need confirmation for participation in the w3c meetings ? I won' t make it on feb 22nd but on march 10th I will attend both as fly on the wall.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@ewingson No need now.. just attend as you can/like. Thanks.
Justin Bingham
@justinwb
@csarven is this meeting still happening?
i’m at https://meet.jit.si/solid-wicg-identity-authentication but there’s no one else here
Justin Bingham
@justinwb
ah is it 5 hours from now
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
:)
Fred Gibson
@gibsonf1
Is there a preferred language predicate to use for setting a user's language?
there is this, but not quite the right thing: https://schema.org/knowsLanguage
Dev380
@Dev380
Hello. I have a few questions about Solid:
1) So, traditionally data is stored by the platform, and you have to trust them with your data and the ability to download your data, etc. But with Solid, you have to trust the pod. Isn't this just moving the problem a level back? 2) Most people are too lazy to make new pods for every app, so then wouldn't a chess website know your name (for example) in Solid but not in the traditional model? 3) What if a Solid app just downloads the data off your pod each time you use it?
Henry Story
@bblfish
Security, like knowledge is not an all or nothing matter. You need many different pieces of the puzzle to fit together.
But you can progress towards better architectures.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven

@gibsonf1 I think we discussed "preferred language" somewhere but can't find it off hand now - if you come across it, let me know. It is along the lines of "preferred license" that can be used as part of a pim:configurationFile or something else ( solid/vocab#6 ). It can guide the application. I'd suggest to be clear .. is the intent to tell the User Agent (eg Accept-Language) - and whether that should just be controlled by the UA, so not a problem to solve here - or application internationalisation (software to adapt to user's preferred language) eg: https://github.com/linkeddata/dokieli/issues/242#issuecomment-409504926 .

You may also want to note the Cognitive Characteristics Ontology: http://smiy.sourceforge.net/cco/spec/cognitivecharacteristics.html . I use cco:skill here: https://csarven.ca/cv

Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
Made a minor update to use ESCO's language skills ( http://data.europa.eu/esco/skill/L ). Fun.
Fred Gibson
@gibsonf1
@csarven impressive!
Henry Story
@bblfish
Does Solid distinguish between a URL ending with / and the same one minus the /? What is the difference in terms of files on the file system? It looks like it does according to the node-solid resource mapper.
I see that It looks like https://an.example/foo requested with text/html would return resource https://an.example/foo.html whereas https://an.example/foo/ could return foo/index.html if the default for a dir is set to index.html
Henry Story
@bblfish
Is that specified, or is that a node-solid choice? I guess the idea is that foo.html is the external view of the container, and foo/index.html the internal view of the container.
Sarven Capadisli
@csarven
@bblfish Container and contained resources can be distinguished. If /foo exists, /foo/ can't exist, and vice versa. It doesn't say anything the URI (Template) for representation URLs https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#uri-slash-semantics
so, servers can use Content-Location if they want to.
Henry Story
@bblfish
If two URIs differ only in the trailing slash, and the server has associated a resource with one of them, then the other URI MUST NOT correspond to another resource.
that seems to say the opposite.