- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:08:34 +0200
- To: business-of-linked-data-bold <business-of-linked-data-bold@googlegroups.com>
- Cc: "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhK-fbs7_PXmovL4cPHwrKS1b3ocm=ZpRgas6NDxgFUf_w@mail.gmail.com>
On 24 August 2016 at 13:55, Kingsley Idehen <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> > wrote: > >> On 8/23/16 6:56 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> >> >> >> On 24 August 2016 at 00:28, Kingsley Idehen <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> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 8/23/16 2:25 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 22 August 2016 at 14:49, Kingsley Idehen <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/ >>>> [2] https://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/solid/ >>>> [3] 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 -- 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 >>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen >>>> Personal WebID: 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. For more >>>> options, visit 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. For more >>> options, visit 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, 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. > 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. 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. > 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 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. > -- > 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 > > -- > 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2016 13:09:06 UTC