Re: W3C Solid Community Group

Great, see you all in an hour and a few minutes from now! :)

I realize the agenda for this one is now full, but since I had already
typed this email, I'll just ask if we can add three topics to the end of
the queue, and what we don't have time for can flow over to the next
meeting:

* cross-server testsuite: we agree that we need something like
https://github.com/w3c/ldp-testsuite + https://github.com/csarven/ldn-tests
+ WAC tests. Who wants to work on this?

* data collections: a collection (term coined by Justin yesterday) would
be something like "my contacts" or "my family photos". It's not necessarily
in  one LDP container, and  it's not necessarily one RDF type. It could
also be data from a specific source,  or data you use in a specific way,
with specific people, or for a specific purpose.  We've been using the type
index for data  discovery, but this is also related to access control. We
need to think more about this concept, since it's key to the sharing UX (
as in "do you allow this app to acess your ... colllection?").

* trusted apps UX: partially this is just the technical implementation
details of the previous topic ("given that the user wants  to  give app X
access to collection Y, how does that work step-by-step with webid and
wac?). This is not specified in detail in the spec but basically the
implementation we have now in NSS needs some work, and we probably want to
standardize this flow a bit across implementations
https://github.com/solid/node-solid-server/issues/1142. Also
https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/issues/142 which came out of the last
meeting.

My 2ct,
Michiel


On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 6:39 AM Mitzi László <mitzil@inrupt.com> wrote:

> Hi W3C Solid Community Group,
>
> There have been three conversations over the email in the past couple of
> weeks:
>
>    1. Ontologies (Timo)
>    2. Identity Model (Timo)
>    3. Header to allow WebID TIS on servers (Melvin)
>
> If you would like to discuss them on the W3C Solid Community Group call
> please let me know. The agenda for the upcoming meeting is set, if we have
> time and you feel prepared we could dip into the additional conversations
> today. What would be helpful would be to define which parts of the spec are
> relevant to this conversation and where in the spec do you think additional
> work would be beneficial.?
>
> Melvin - in réponse to your question earlier, the purpose of the document
> on The Default was to demonstrate what I have in mind in preparation for an
> official conversation with our group in the upcoming call to decide how to
> move forward together.
>
> Mitzi
>
>