Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
143 lines (111 loc) · 7.46 KB

2024-02-14.md

File metadata and controls

143 lines (111 loc) · 7.46 KB
Raw

W3C Solid Community Group: Weekly

Present

Announcements

Meeting Guidelines

  • W3C Solid Community Group Calendar.
  • W3C Solid Community Group Meeting Guidelines.
  • No audio or video recording, or automated transcripts without consent. Meetings are transcribed and made public. If consent is withheld by anyone, recording/retention must not occur.
  • Join queue to talk.
  • Topics can be proposed at the bottom of the agenda to be discussed as time allows. Make it known if a topic is urgent or cannot be postponed.

Participation and Code of Conduct

Scribes

  • elf Pavlik

Introductions

  • name: text

Status of the WG

  • PAC: I'm having conversation with ??? The next step is to submit a new charter. The horizontal review should be relatively fast. Then we will have votes of AC. If we still have formal objections, we should go ASAP to the new council. Many objections have been addressed; some objections can be argued in front of the council.
  • HZ: I recall that Sarven was considering only one objection valid. It was related to the chair selection. There was also something about the scope and the explainer. Tim has already written an explainer. What exactly has to be rewritten?
  • PAC: Open PRs already cover what needs to be covered. There were concerns about us trying to have the current spec rubber stamped. Someone noted that Solid was mentioned 15 times. We should have been more careful about that. The final Solid specification can be different than current Solid.
  • AC: The term "Solid" has been a point of objection. I think Solid is important for branding, but less important on the spec level. To what extent can we remove the use of the term "Solid"? This could involve the name of the group. That should address a lot of concerns about rubber stamping.
  • PAC: +1, the only problem is coming up with another name. I'm considering this option as well.
  • PAC: we can also clarify what "Solid" means. From process perspective, more neutrality could help.
  • RG: Solid defines three bullet points that it tries to accomplish. Can we state those points? We should be more precise with the language.
  • eP: Does the charter include use cases & requirements? That could help clarify goals of Solid.
  • PAC: I noticed that we don't mention the UCR document. It is common to have one as a WG Note. Charter refers to the use cases repo.

Solid World

  • on track for 2024-02-27
  • (JZ asked if the time of the CG meeting could be adjusted so PST folks could attend)
  • HZ: It was announced last week; it will focus on the Practitioners group. There are four speakers ...
  • eP: We can make online polls for CG weekly and STM
  • AC: Some groups have rotating schedule; this can also be considered.
  • RG: The problem with Wednesdays is that there are other meetings that follow. If we push it two hours ahead, this will conflict with other meetings.
  • TBL: SolidOS meets after this meeting

Co-chairs Rotation Schedule

URL: #618

Topics

Demo

Special Topic Meetings

URL: https://github.com/orgs/solid/projects/16/views/1 (outstanding: proposed in previous CG meeting: FedCM, notifications) RG: (provided there is consensus, sufficient cohort) request an STM on notifications to discuss ??? elf Pavlik's implementation? interests: please fill in ??? and PR#192 for Feb 27 or Mar 5.

  • RG: I need more time from the people to provide review on Quick Notifications.
  • HZ: We could schedule a bunch of them and send out invites; people will RSVP.
  • RG: ...

Add security consideration for serving user-created files

URL: #598 (outstanding: ACTION: eP to make PR with security threat use cases and capture one discussed in the PR)

Clarify requests with N3 document in server-representation-turtle-jsonld

URL: #608 (outstanding: eP: Bring it back next week when Sarven will present)

  • DONE

Quick Notifications

URL: solid/notifications#192 (outstanding: RG: (Announcement Only) Request for reviews!)

  • RH: please take a look!
  • eP: Has HTML diff improved?
  • RH: There have been some improvements.

Release 0.11.0 Milestone issues

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/milestone/7

  • eP: I think those two "about" descriptions should be removed from the milestone, otherwise they will block it.

PROPOSAL: remove #355 and #227 from the 0.11 milestone (keeping them open)

  • eP: +1
  • HZ: +1
  • AC: +1
  • RG: 0
  • PAC: +1
  • ME: 0
  • RG: Are you planning to add it to 0.12?
  • HZ: This will depend on formation of the WG.
  • HZ: There are also URI normalization and IRI; how should we address them?

Specify container description

URL: #227

see above

Server Description

URL: #355 (outstanding: setup STM)

see above

Should Solid (storage) servers support "RDF documents" containing multiple subjects (or quads)?

URL: #610

  • eP: PROPOSAL: attach label and ping Maxime to resolve it
  • HZ: +1

Recommend predicate for a literal media type (Content-Type)

URL: #537

  • RG: IETF will standardize format for content types. Maybe we should register ???
  • PAC: ... subtypes, i agree that having an easy way to reference media type could be useful.
  • AC: should this fall under the notion of specifying container description?
  • eP: I'm using it in Description Resource, if app wants to show an icon for attachment, etc.

Fine tune wording of the requirement for including Content-Type in the response

URL: #565