superset and subset specification

On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 6:07 PM Nathan Rixham <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:

> ... unless either:
> a) a superset specification was designed, which essentially says any <uri>
> which dereference to an RDF response that asserts <uri> a :Agent (where
> :Agent is a well specified class in a published ontology) w/ note MAY 303
> to handle range-14, or
> b) a subset specification was designed, as above but constrained to a
> single media type json(-ld)
>
> My personal opinion would be either to let it just move to solid and kill
> this group, or take some consensus to scrap the current specification, and
> produce (a) + (b) above, where (a) is deferred to by solid and anything
> else implementing webid, and (b) is a subset which allows parties to
> produce a very specific set of tooling, webid implementations that are only
> json-ld.
>

This could be merged to one specification, which also defined an open ended
list of sub specifications, as such:

WebID broadly defines a <uri> which dereferences to an RDF response that
asserts <uri> a webid:Agent, is a webid. (note about 303)

WebID also defines an open ended list of sub specifications, where for each
valid rdf response type, webid-{type} is an implementation which is
constrained to require only that specific type.

With that, we'd cover all bases, and webid-turtle, webid-jsonld, and many
more, would automatically fall out.

The specification would likely never need to be updated, be quite concise,
and require only the publication of a simple vocabulary to cover
webid:Agent, or some such universal term.

The current webid specification, would be superseded by both WebID, and
its inferred subspecification WebID-Turtle.