- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 10:00:44 -0400
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: business-of-linked-data-bold <business-of-linked-data-bold@googlegroups.com>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <82ef657e-762e-d629-997f-934bea8ad1fe@openlinksw.com>
On 9/2/16 8:54 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > > On 25 August 2016 at 15:36, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com > <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: > > On 8/25/16 5:24 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> >> On 25 August 2016 at 04:10, Kingsley Idehen >> <kidehen@openlinksw.com <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >> >> On 8/24/16 2:00 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 24 August 2016 at 18:25, Kingsley Idehen >>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>> >>> On 8/24/16 9:08 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 August 2016 at 13:55, Kingsley Idehen >>>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com >>>> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 8/24/16 3:52 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 24 August 2016 at 04:17, Kingsley Idehen >>>>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com >>>>> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 8/23/16 6:56 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 24 August 2016 at 00:28, Kingsley Idehen >>>>>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com >>>>>> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8/23/16 5:36 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>>>>> yes, i was able to create a file, nice! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23 August 2016 at 20:43, Kingsley >>>>>>> Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com >>>>>>> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8/23/16 2:25 PM, Melvin Carvalho >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 22 August 2016 at 14:49, >>>>>>>> Kingsley Idehen >>>>>>>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 8/22/16 4:34 AM, Timothy >>>>>>>> Holborn wrote: >>>>>>>>> Kingsley, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Most of the interesting open >>>>>>>>> data related platforms plug >>>>>>>>> into Virtuoso. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> They support open standards. >>>>>>>> Virtuoso supports open standards. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think you need to step it up >>>>>>>>> a bit, and am happy to help, >>>>>>>>> but am unsure of the best way >>>>>>>>> to go about it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am totally unsure of what >>>>>>>> Virtuoso has to add to this >>>>>>>> matter. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If SoLiD is Virtuoso >>>>>>>>> compatible, I think the answer >>>>>>>>> is bit of a >>>>>>>>> no-brainer. >>>>>>>>> Question remains one of >>>>>>>>> business systems, rather than >>>>>>>>> exclusively Tech. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Virtuoso supports all the open >>>>>>>> standards covered by SoLiD, and >>>>>>>> some (e.g., WebID+TLS+Delegation). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We need to speak clearly about >>>>>>>> these issues otherwise we have >>>>>>>> nothing but confusion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What will be really amazing is when >>>>>>>> Solid apps are tested to run on an >>>>>>>> openlink backend and vice versa. >>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> Melvin, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So why don't I share a folder >>>>>>> endpoint [1] and the you try to use >>>>>>> SoLiD to create a document in that >>>>>>> folder? Naturally, I would need to >>>>>>> grant access to you via your WebID >>>>>>> (which I assume to be: >>>>>>> https://melvincarvalho.com/#me) . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Links: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> http://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid/ >>>>>>> <http://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid/> >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid/ >>>>>>> <https://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid/> >>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>> http://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid%2Cacl >>>>>>> <http://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid%2Cacl> >>>>>>> -- ACL doc (your webid has access to >>>>>>> this too!) >>>>>>> [4] >>>>>>> https://linkeddata.uriburner.com/rdf-editor >>>>>>> <https://linkeddata.uriburner.com/rdf-editor> >>>>>>> -- Editor that can be used to >>>>>>> compare experience re. creation of >>>>>>> document in the sample/qa folder. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kingsley Idehen >>>>>>> Founder & CEO >>>>>>> OpenLink Software (Home Page: http://www.openlinksw.com) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Medium Blog: https://medium.com/@kidehen >>>>>>> Blogspot Blog: http://kidehen.blogspot.com >>>>>>> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen >>>>>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about >>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about> >>>>>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen >>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen> >>>>>>> Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this >>>>>>> <http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- You received this message because >>>>>>> you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Business Of Linked Data >>>>>>> (BOLD)" group. To unsubscribe from >>>>>>> this group and stop receiving emails >>>>>>> from it, send an email to >>>>>>> business-of-linked-data-bold+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >>>>>>> <mailto:business-of-linked-data-bold+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. >>>>>>> For more options, visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- You received this message because you >>>>>>> are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>>>> "Business Of Linked Data (BOLD)" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop >>>>>>> receiving emails from it, send an email >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> business-of-linked-data-bold+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >>>>>>> <mailto:business-of-linked-data-bold+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. >>>>>>> For more options, visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >>>>>> >>>>>> Melvin, >>>>>> >>>>>> Does that imply things are fine re. SoLiD >>>>>> or not? >>>>>> >>>>>> One test is passing at least, which is a good >>>>>> sign! >>>>>> I think to say things are 'fine' we really >>>>>> need to develop a test suite and run >>>>>> tests. There may be other >>>>>> ways, but that seems to be tried and tested. >>>>> >>>>> Melvin, >>>>> >>>>> I am trying to avoid "OpenLink doesn't support >>>>> SoLiD" cycles that keep on reoccurring. >>>>> >>>>> Got it. But it requires testing and >>>>> possibly some bug fixing. >>>>>  >>>>> >>>>> If there is a pattern that fails it should be >>>>> identified and demonstrated. >>>>> >>>>> This is where a test suite comes in >>>>> handy. W3C working groups typically >>>>> require 1-3 years for this. I think we >>>>> need a similar process. There may be short cuts >>>>> but it would normally require one dedicated tester. >>>> >>>> W3C process != Practical Commercial process. >>>> >>>> Having worked on interop for more than 20+ years >>>> re., standards like SQL, ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET >>>> <http://ADO.NET>, HTTP, and others, the process has >>>> more to do with willingness to collaborate than >>>> anything else. >>>> >>>> Given a server application (server) that implements >>>> standard X, there should be N number of client >>>> application (client) users willing enough to test >>>> interop as part of a practical QA process. Right >>>> now, the big issue is that interop gets scoped to >>>> the wrong levels. >>>> >>>> Presently I see people testing Solid against >>>> node-solid-server and gold. Previously I have seen >>>> testing against LDPHP. I've only seen you and >>>> sometimes me test against an openlink back end and >>>> that's when we have a bit of time free. >>> Yes, but once again, its a case of understanding the >>> roles of compliant servers and clients. Virtuoso is a >>> compliant server. All you need is an endpoint and away >>> you go. It either works or it fails. If it fails simply >>> report what's failing. >>> >>> Is virtuoso Solid compliant? Compliant to what? Has it >>> been tested? >> What do you mean by any of those questions? Put >> differently, why don't you provide cURL based examples of >> what doesn't work, based on your expectations? >>> Does it handle globbing? >> cURL example please. >>> Does it handle websockets? >> You now it does. >>> Does it comply to the ACL spec? >> How did you end up creating a resource in a folder if it >> didn't comply with ACLs scoped to your WebID? >>> Does it support inboxes? >> What is an inbox? Put differently, how is it different from >> folder where you store documents? >>> Does it support Linked Data Notifications. >> No it doesn't . >>> Does it comply to the sections of the latest solid spec? >> What are those? >>> What browser coverage does it have, what breaks? These are >>> questions we are going through on a daily basis with other >>> backends. >> Instead of asking these questions you could demonstrate your >> point with a SoLiD client and/or curl interaction examples. >>>  >>> >>>> What do I mean by "wrong levels" ? The fact that >>>> this kind of testing gets lost in presumptive >>>> patterns rife with compilation and platform >>>> dependencies e.g., open source and all the modules >>>> required to be located and built. After that, >>>> testers then find out that they have to right code >>>> to perform basic interop. >>>> >>>> I think you mean people do not have the time to work >>>> though and fix bugs. >>> No, I mean it is being approached the wrong way. What >>> you need is: 1. List of compliant servers and their live >>> endpoints 2. List of compliant clients 3. Folks testing >>> the clients and the servers (this doesn't always have to >>> be the developers of either client or server being >>> tested). There isn't a single guideline that states: To >>> verify or have some else verify SoLiD based interop, >>> simply add your SoLiD compliant server and its endpoint >>> to the list in the page at >>> <some-server-usage-doc-location-uri> . To verify or have >>> some else verify SoLiD based interop, simply add your >>> SoLiD compliant client applications and a usage guide >>> document link to the page at: >>> <some-client-app-usage-doc-location-uri> . Post your >>> results or share you experience via comments or reports >>> to a document at: <some-interop-results-doc-location-uri> . >>> >>> We are doing this constantly in the gitter channel. Behind >>> that lies the github solid repo which has active issue >>> tracking. >>>  >>> >>>>  As it's a new technology inevitably there will be >>>> bugs, it needs a lot of persistence to work through. >>>> Openlink is not immune to bugs either, I have found and >>>> reported some myself. >>> Do you have a link to SoLiD related bugs or issues? >>> That's all we need. >>> >>> Various repos under: https://github.com/solid >>> Pretty much all have issue tracking >>>  >>> >>>> Interop should simply be about compliant client N >>>> talking to compliant server X. That's it. We don't >>>> need 6 months to pull that off, let alone 1-3 years. >>>> >>>> I am happy to perform interop with anyone (partner >>>> or competitor or customer) using the basic pattern >>>> outlined above. The end results are mutually >>>> beneficial, as they should be, when working with >>>> standards compliance. >>>> >>>> Then just do it! >>> I am confused. What is it that we haven't done? >>> >>> Any kind of serious testing. My original point. If solid >>> apps work on virtuoso that's going to be a big win. Write >>> a backend, write apps. Test on virtuoso, test on node >>> solid server, test on gold. That is the test of >>> compliance. Failing that, work on passing a test suite. >>>  >>> >>>>  I still believe the process we are using right now >>>> has not yielded fast progress, but a working group >>>> where people actually commit to deliverables does >>>> achieve interop. It's just a question of how much >>>> time each process takes. The thing about a WG is that >>>> you generally commit 1 day a week or as much as 0.5 of >>>> a FTE, per company involved. That's a more resource >>>> that is currently being employed. >>> There is subtle confusion about my point reflected in >>> your last two comments. If a SoLiD client fails to work >>> with my Virtuoso instance, then simply indicate what the >>> issue is. You can also share a list of SoLiD apps here >>> and I can once again test them. That said, I have zero >>> interest in compiling anyting or heading out on module >>> graph bounties. I just want to install something and test. >>> >>> Yes, I think we're talking high level perspective vs low >>> level perspective. The devil is in the detail. >>> I will be working on my own back end "solid live" and the >>> acid test for me will be whether solid apps can work with it. >> Your description of SoLiD, as exemplified by this exchange, >> isn't how you make progress. First off, you need to be able >> to actually describe what SoLiD actually is, clearly. Simply >> declaring things as compliant vs non compliant, without any >> clarity isn't the way to generate uptake and interop >> activity. What is the fundamental goal of SoLiD? What is does >> it actually offer right now, that uniquely distinguishes it >> with regards to using HTTP, WebDAV, LDP, Web ACLs, WebID+TLS, >> WebID+TLS+Delegation, SPARQL Graph Protocol, SPARQL 1.1 etc. >> to perform Read-Write operations? Answering this question is >> crucial :) Kingsley >> >> Have you looked at this? https://github.com/solid/solid-spec >> <https://github.com/solid/solid-spec> > > Melvin, > > You know I've looked at that, and much more. We are having a > public discussion and its really important that you (and other > SoLiD supporters) embark on the following: > > 1. Articulate what problem SoLiD solves, uniquely > > 2. Demonstrate how SoLiD delivers on its value proposition via > simple Client and Server implementations that just work i.e., no > coding and compilation involved. > > We have a maze of technologies and "best practices" all conflated > under SoLiD, unfortunately. That doesn't make for a sound interop > basis when you have failure points at the following levels: > > [1] WebID Authentication using WebID+TLS protocol > > [2] WebID+TLS authentication protocol and Browser UX issue -- > which is solved by WebID+TLS+Delegation protocol > > [3] Non-existent interop efforts across WebID+TLS, > WebID+TLS+Delegation compliant clients and servers > > [4] Non-existent interop efforts across WebACL compliant clients > and servers > > [5] All of the above for LDP compliant clients and servers; ditto > SPARQL Graph Protocol and SPARQL 1.1 compliant clients and servers. > > Without 1-5 sorted out, you have nothing to work with, in a > practical sense. > Melvin, What problem does SoLiD solve, uniquely? Put differently, you (and SoLiD) supporters have to answer the following clearly: What is SoLiD? Why is it important? How do I use it? > My suggestion to test solid compliance might be to see if this profile > editor works with a given backend > https://linkeddata.github.io/profile-editor/ > There's also an issue tracker linked to page Here's an illustration of what I experience: https://www.pinterest.com/kidehen/solid-interop/ . WebID+TLS handling is problematic, and that's more to do with WebID+TLS interop issues associated with the chosen WebID+TLS authentication module used in the framework to build that editor. You've already successfully created resources in my Data Space where authentication is WebID+TLS and/or WebID+TLS+Delegation based, leveraging a WebACL. That's has nothing to do with SoLiD and everything to do with a Read-Write leveraging existing open standards etc.. What is WebID+TLS? A an open standards-based protocol for authenticating Agent identity, at Web-scale . Why is it important? It enables Read-Write operations across Data Spaces on an HTTP network using an HTTP user agent (or client). How do I use it? Simply perform the following steps: 1. Make a profile document on your local computer 2. Publish the profile document to an HTTP-accessible location 3. Generate an X.509 Certificate using information from the HTTP-accessible profile document -- during this process, use the HTTP URL of the profile document + "#i" to create a WebID which is then used a the value of the Subject Alternative Name field 4. Test WebID+TLS authentication protocol using the product of 1-3. Tools: 1. http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html -- Example of a tool for WebID+TLS protocol testing 2. http://id.myopenlink.net/youid/ -- Example of a tool for X.509 Certificate endowed with WebID in SAN generation (choose the WebID-Profile Document from the Profile data Provider drop-down). -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software (Home Page: http://www.openlinksw.com) Medium Blog: https://medium.com/@kidehen Blogspot Blog: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 2 September 2016 14:01:11 UTC