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: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 11:24:04 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+=NtgocQ+FHULnBegjJNjH8YY0+csRiAMjDgg_mPZyog@mail.gmail.com>
To: business-of-linked-data-bold <business-of-linked-data-bold@googlegroups.com>
Cc: public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
On 25 August 2016 at 04:10, Kingsley Idehen <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>
> 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?
>
> 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


>
>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
> --
> 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 Thursday, 25 August 2016 09:24:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 25 August 2016 09:24:42 UTC