W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > August 2016

Re: How the father of the World Wide Web plans to reclaim it from Facebook and Google

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 20:00:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhKBRqPgtaCDE5Xbd5QVsO2XC3v3-W6LcYiTtijLveKDjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: business-of-linked-data-bold <business-of-linked-data-bold@googlegroups.com>
Cc: public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
On 24 August 2016 at 18:25, Kingsley Idehen <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>
> 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,ÂÂÂ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>> ÂÂÂ
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.ÂÂ
>> ÂÂ
>>
>>> 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.
>
> 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?  Does
it handle globbing?  Does it handle websockets?  Does it comply to the ACL
spec?  Does it support inboxes?  Does it support Linked Data
Notifications.  Does it comply to the sections of the latest solid spec?
What browser coverage does it have, what breaks?  These are questions we
are going through on a daily basis with other backends.


> 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.


> --
> 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 18:01:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 24 August 2016 18:01:26 UTC