13:51:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #lws
13:51:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/07/20-lws-irc
13:51:29 <acoburn> zakim, start meeting
13:51:29 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:51:31 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), acoburn
13:51:43 <acoburn> meeting: Linked Web Storage
13:51:47 <acoburn> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/a19ab7dc-1753-433d-bac5-64e3ad8c0a43/20260720T100000/#agenda
13:51:47 <agendabot> clear agenda
13:51:47 <agendabot> agenda+ Introduction & Announcements
13:51:47 <agendabot> agenda+ Vote: Storage Description Resource as CID -> PR#183 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/183
13:51:47 <agendabot> agenda+ Vote: HTTP Query method for Type Index -> PR#179 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/179
13:51:48 <agendabot> agenda+ Test suite & Implementation work
13:51:51 <agendabot> agenda+ Threat Model work item -> PR#202 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/202
13:51:53 <agendabot> agenda+ Discuss: Introduction -> PR#158 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/158  & Diagrams -> PR#159 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/159
13:51:57 <agendabot> agenda+ Discuss: Vocabulary & JSON-LD issues -> PR#194 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/194  / -> PR#187 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/187  / -> PR#199 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/199
13:52:01 <agendabot> agenda+ Discuss: Metadata resources
13:52:03 <agendabot> agenda+ Discuss: Idempotent create -> Issue#173 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/issues/173
13:52:21 <acoburn> rrsagent, make minutes
13:52:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/20-lws-minutes.html acoburn
13:52:47 <acoburn> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/07/13-lws-minutes.html
13:52:57 <acoburn> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/07/27-lws-minutes.html
13:54:21 <acoburn> rrsagent, make minutes
13:54:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/20-lws-minutes.html acoburn
13:57:04 <TallTed> acoburn -- I've been trying to prepare for this call, and struggling to understand what the votes are. There are not clear questions in either cited PR. I guess maybe the votes are on whether to merge them in their current state? But there would then need to be new issues for the multiple open questions in each.
13:58:08 <TallTed> present+
13:58:31 <acoburn> TallTed the Storage Description vote is to determine the direction we, as a group, want to go. I.e. (1) Storage Description is a CID with storage as a subject
13:58:55 <acoburn> or (2) Storage Description is a CID with storage description as a subject or (3) Storage Description is not a CID
13:59:08 <acoburn> once we have consensus there, I'll adjust the PR as needed
13:59:20 <acoburn> For the HTTP Query method, it is about whether to merge the PR
13:59:51 <elf-pavlik> elf-pavlik has joined #lws
14:00:13 <acoburn> present+
14:00:37 <elf-pavlik> present+
14:00:48 <eBremer> eBremer has joined #lws
14:01:30 <acoburn> chair: acoburn
14:02:20 <TallTed> acoburn -- I submit that in future, the agenda items should include such details as you have now provided here. I am obviously not prepared to vote on either of the above propositions, but perhaps sufficient other participants will be, to make a quorum-satisfying vote.
14:02:23 <langsamu> langsamu has joined #lws
14:02:34 <acoburn> +1, will do
14:03:03 <gibsonf1> gibsonf1 has joined #lws
14:03:06 <jeremycaine> jeremycaine has joined #lws
14:03:12 <gibsonf1> present+
14:03:20 <jeremycaine> present+
14:03:23 <eBremer> present+
14:03:41 <langsamu> present+
14:03:47 <ericP> ericP has joined #lws
14:03:53 <ericP> present+
14:04:58 <eBremer> scribe+
14:05:51 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 1
14:05:51 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Introduction & Announcements -- taken up [from agendabot]
14:06:53 <eBremer> acoburn: Ted made good point about listing the actual test for the votes ahead of time
14:06:56 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 2
14:06:56 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Vote: Storage Description Resource as CID -> PR#183 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/183 -- taken up [from agendabot]
14:07:27 <eBremer> ... vote not about merging PR in its current for but direction we want to go
14:07:50 <eBremer> .. defining storage desc resource as a specialization of SID 1.0
14:08:03 <eBremer> where storage a specialization of the SID
14:08:18 <eBremer> but the SD is a subject of the CID
14:08:28 <eBremer> ...not the storage
14:08:41 <acoburn> PROPOSAL: Define Storage Description resources as a specialization of CID-1.0 with Storage as the subject of the CID
14:08:54 <elf-pavlik> +1
14:09:04 <acoburn> +1
14:09:05 <jeremycaine> +1
14:09:14 <eBremer> s/but the SD is a subject of the CID/...but the SD is a subject of the CID
14:09:16 <eBremer> +1
14:09:23 <gibsonf1> +1
14:09:49 <eBremer> s/SID/CID
14:10:04 <acoburn> RESOLVED: Define Storage Description resources as a specialization of CID-1.0 with Storage as the subject of the CID
14:10:13 <acoburn> PROPOSAL: Define Storage Description resources as a specialization of CID-1.0 with StorageDescription as the subject of the CID
14:10:13 <eBremer> acoburn: it looks like that pasted.  marking as resolved
14:10:36 <acoburn> -1 (per first resolution)
14:10:45 <eBremer> ... 2nd one basically conflicts with the first one were the storage desc is the subject of the CID
14:10:51 <jeremycaine> -1
14:11:02 <elf-pavlik> -1
14:11:04 <TallTed> s/pasted/passed
14:11:05 <gibsonf1> -1
14:11:31 <eBremer> -1
14:12:05 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 3
14:12:05 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Vote: HTTP Query method for Type Index -> PR#179 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/179 -- taken up [from agendabot]
14:12:08 <eBremer> acoburn: i will integrate this into the proposal
14:12:21 <eBremer> ... query method for the type index
14:12:45 <elf-pavlik> scribe+
14:12:49 <eBremer> ... replaces get and post with http method with query
14:13:27 <elf-pavlik> eBremer: with RFC 10008 becoming a stable proposal now we can use QUERY HTTP method
14:13:57 <elf-pavlik> ... one concern from PAC was that it could be premature and we may need GET/POST as a follback
14:13:59 <TallTed> q+
14:14:05 <elf-pavlik> ... I see rapid adoption and we should be fine
14:14:06 <acoburn> ack next
14:14:29 <gibsonf1> q+
14:14:30 <elf-pavlik> TallTed: as as QUERY may be adopted by software producers, upgrading software in place may take years to roll out
14:14:41 <elf-pavlik> ... I think the fallback is important
14:14:53 <elf-pavlik> q+ to suggest waiting for demand for fallback
14:14:56 <acoburn> ack next
14:15:19 <elf-pavlik> gibsonf1: since everyone to comply with LWS will need to build new software, I don't see need to have that fallback
14:15:23 <acoburn> ack next
14:15:24 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to suggest waiting for demand for fallback
14:15:26 <elf-pavlik> scribe-
14:15:37 <jeswr> jeswr has joined #lws
14:15:37 <langsamu> langsamu has joined #lws
14:16:08 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: should prematurely drop a fall back.  wait for implementations to request it
14:16:08 <jeswr> q+ Many HTTP clients either already support HTTP Query or are rapidly adopting it
14:16:13 <jeremycaine> q+
14:16:16 <elf-pavlik> scribe+
14:16:34 <elf-pavlik> jeswr: I don't think we will encouter many issue with clients understanding QUERY
14:16:49 <elf-pavlik> ... most clients support any method name, the default semantics work for query
14:16:52 <eBremer> jeswr: I dont think we will run into many clients not able to handle QUERY as most client are able to issue QUERY now
14:16:58 <elf-pavlik> scribe-
14:17:18 <acoburn> ack next
14:17:18 <eBremer> ... were seeing a lot of client libraries quickly implementing support
14:17:43 <eBremer> jeremycaine: i think what people are saying about QUERY is probably right.
14:17:57 <jeswr> q+
14:18:04 <eBremer> ... but people coming along might build on something like node and the potentially not quite able to support this
14:18:30 <eBremer> ... then there the agent that talks to AWS client that interacts with the LWS server
14:18:44 <acoburn> ack next
14:18:52 <eBremer> ...but maybe what Jesse is saying that its already ready
14:18:54 <gibsonf1> q+
14:19:06 <acoburn> ack next
14:19:12 <eBremer> jeswr: jeremy covered it.  i dont anticipate issues with building on this
14:19:41 <eBremer> gibsonf1: the http library we're using doesnt support queries we will have to add that into the library
14:19:56 <eBremer> but adding GET and POST will make that alot more complicated
14:20:15 <TallTed> s/but adding GET/... but adding GET/
14:20:30 <eBremer> acoburn: once we start getting implementation feed back, i think that will be very informative
14:20:34 <elf-pavlik> having tests for it may support that feedback loop
14:20:52 <eBremer> ... any other comments before we go to a vote
14:21:15 <acoburn> PROPOSAL: Adopt QUERY method for the type index as proposed in https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/179
14:21:16 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/179 -> Pull Request 179 Replace GET/POST with new HTTP QUERY RFC10008 (by ebremer) [link-index]
14:21:20 <elf-pavlik> +1
14:21:22 <gibsonf1> +1
14:21:27 <eBremer> +1
14:21:28 <jeremycaine> +1
14:21:31 <acoburn> +1
14:22:10 <acoburn> RESOLVED: Adopt QUERY method for the type index as proposed in https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/179
14:22:11 <ericP> +1
14:22:28 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 4
14:22:28 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Test suite & Implementation work -- taken up [from agendabot]
14:22:58 <eBremer> acoburn: hear from Shamoo and both Erics
14:23:24 <acoburn> s/Shamoo/Samu
14:23:28 <eBremer> s/shamoo/samu
14:23:32 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat has joined #lws
14:24:13 <eBremer> samu: started writing .net implementation fo LWS
14:24:22 <eBremer> ... working on low-level fuctionality
14:24:36 <eBremer> ... i will be working on query as I get to it
14:24:46 <eBremer> ... implemented range request handling stuff like that
14:25:04 <eBremer> ... focusing on readability and idiomatic code
14:25:23 <elf-pavlik> q+ to ask when common test suite be used by this C# impl. and jeswr's Sparq impl.
14:25:33 <eBremer> ... been looking and learning the spec and discussing with Jesse
14:26:16 <eBremer> acoburn: we will love any feed back from any one as a implementer and ask question now or at a later meeting
14:26:26 <acoburn> ack next
14:26:27 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to ask when common test suite be used by this C# impl. and jeswr's Sparq impl.
14:26:28 <eBremer> samu: i will do that thank you
14:26:31 <gibsonf1> q+ to ask about implementation issue
14:27:11 <jeswr> q+
14:27:12 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: i understand you  are working on a sample implementation and the test suite but noticed that Jesse jas this Sparq project.
14:27:38 <eBremer> ... how soon before you think there will be something that can be used by multiple implementations
14:27:59 <eBremer> samu: a month or two but difficult to commit a proper timeline
14:28:31 <eBremer> jeswr: sparq is complete gen AI. it does run against tests that have been written
14:28:42 <ericP> q+ to say I moved PR#145's lws10-test-suite to https://github.com/lws-contrib/lws-test-suite/tree/main/lws10
14:28:50 <eBremer> ... will contribute tests to repo that EricP has created
14:28:58 <acoburn> ack next
14:28:59 <Zakim> gibsonf, you wanted to ask about implementation issue
14:28:59 <eBremer> ... Erich B has does something similar
14:29:15 <ryey> ryey has joined #lws
14:29:21 <ryey> present+
14:29:25 <eBremer> gibsonf1: not sure if this handled, when a container and a data resource are the same URI
14:30:01 <eBremer> acoburn: in that case you would have a two link headers one about the data resource and the other for thew container aspect or something like that
14:30:05 <elf-pavlik> q+ to offer help with https://dagger.io/ based setup to run tests locally and on CI
14:30:19 <jeremycaine> q+
14:30:43 <eBremer> gibsonf1: issue spec requiring an object of a certain format fore both container and resource from the server os what as array of those two objects.  that is my question
14:31:12 <eBremer> acoburn: yoi will have a resource that is both of these things
14:32:07 <acoburn> q?
14:32:15 <acoburn> ack next
14:32:54 <acoburn> ack next
14:32:55 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say I moved PR#145's lws10-test-suite to https://github.com/lws-contrib/lws-test-suite/tree/main/lws10
14:33:37 <eBremer>  ericP: I move PR#145 into LWS contrib/lws-test-suite
14:33:38 <gb> Issue 145 not found
14:33:48 <eBremer> ... wont stay there..just a plave where me and jesse can work on it
14:33:58 <eBremer> ... will be moved to w3c organization at some point
14:34:13 <acoburn> ack next
14:34:14 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to offer help with https://dagger.io/ based setup to run tests locally and on CI
14:34:17 <eBremer> acoburn: if you could close that pr if it is empty
14:34:40 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: there was docker instance which made it easier
14:35:05 <eBremer> ... happy to offer to help people integrate in their dev setup
14:35:20 <acoburn> ack next
14:35:20 <eBremer> samu: authoring that part is mine and thank you
14:35:40 <eBremer> jeremycaine: maybe in lws-test: what is scope of the test suite.
14:36:14 <eBremer> ... building a rust-based solid server there were things I couldnt do i had to move it to google cloud
14:36:42 <eBremer> .. is the lws test suite going to cover every apsect of the spec for somebody using it
14:37:03 <eBremer> ericP: try to test every normative feature for w3c acceptance
14:37:24 <eBremer> jeremycaine: issues with TLS re-directs
14:37:42 <eBremer> ericP: cause you needed local server to do the local dances?
14:37:50 <eBremer> jeremycaine: yeah
14:38:14 <eBremer> acoburn: just focus on forth coming software that samu is working on
14:38:32 <eBremer> samu: i have exp with solid test conformance harness
14:38:51 <eBremer> ... my aim to cover all MUSTS and I will def aim to do it and make it easy to run
14:39:01 <eBremer> ... should be issue with security re-directs
14:39:06 <acoburn> q?
14:39:25 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 5
14:39:25 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Threat Model work item -> PR#202 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/202 -- taken up [from agendabot]
14:39:44 <eBremer> s/should be issue with security/shouldn't be any issues with security
14:39:54 <ericP> https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/145 had 0 files changed after moving lws10-test-suite/ to lws-contrib/lws-test-suite/lws10 . CLOSED
14:39:55 <gb> https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/145 -> CLOSED Pull Request 145 test: create strawman test suite (by ericprud)
14:40:32 <acoburn> -> Threat model for LWS https://raw.githack.com/renyuneyun/lws-protocol/threat-model/threat-model/index.html
14:40:40 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: using template created by one of the authors threat modeling guide
14:41:10 <eBremer> ... this is how its structured.
14:41:19 <eBremer> ... this is early starter something we can iterate on
14:41:40 <eBremer> ... invite everyone to review it, we can create issue and follow up PR
14:41:44 <elf-pavlik> https://hackers4peace.github.io/likec4-example-customization/#lws
14:41:59 <eBremer> ... dropped better version of diagram in the IRC
14:42:52 <eBremer> ... I want to focus (related to jeremy) basic setup of the system that we model threat around
14:43:11 <eBremer> ... focus to discuss if this is a good starting point
14:44:27 <eBremer> ... a minimal set up with what we would work with
14:44:46 <eBremer> ... create variance like C4, its very flexible
14:45:00 <eBremer> ... can we agree within next week if this is a good starting point?
14:45:21 <gibsonf1> q+
14:45:31 <eBremer> ryey: page is adopted from other and there may be some content from others
14:45:46 <eBremer> ... if you se something not right, please let us know as it is likely at this point
14:45:49 <acoburn> ack next
14:46:20 <eBremer> gibsonf1: can we use same terminology for the components that Jeremy's been setting up
14:46:31 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: yes  totally
14:47:03 <eBremer> ... we should align and eventually the udnerlying model we use in the C4 model
14:47:29 <elf-pavlik> q+ to give shout out for the LikeC4 open source project
14:47:31 <eBremer> acoburn: people please comment on this PR at least as a starting point
14:47:51 <jeremycaine> q+
14:47:56 <acoburn> ack next
14:47:57 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to give shout out for the LikeC4 open source project
14:47:58 <eBremer> ... could affect LWS implementations
14:48:28 <elf-pavlik> https://github.com/sponsors/likec4
14:48:31 <eBremer> elf-pavlik: divided work between myself and ryey
14:48:48 <eBremer> ... good to support maintainers
14:48:53 <acoburn> ack next
14:48:58 <eBremer> ... for open source tool we are using
14:49:28 <eBremer> jeremycaine: confirm the PR is a start and not locked in yet
14:49:45 <eBremer> acoburn: yes, next week to adopt basic structure
14:49:50 <eBremer> ... this would be a starting point
14:50:23 <eBremer> acoburn: shout out to Pavlik and ryey for getting this together
14:50:41 <acoburn> zakim, open agendum 6
14:50:41 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Discuss: Introduction -> PR#158 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/158  & Diagrams -> PR#159 https://github.com/w3c/lws-protocol/pull/159 -- taken up [from
14:50:44 <Zakim> ... agendabot]
14:51:23 <eBremer> jeremycaine: we have the intro PR and the diagrams pull request
14:51:29 <eBremer> ... intro pretty much there
14:51:53 <eBremer> ... intro should not be detailed description and get to vite next week
14:52:07 <eBremer> ... the diagrams still need a bit of work
14:52:27 <eBremer> ... few things to resolve like Fred was saying resource manager should be LWS manager
14:52:37 <eBremer> ... describing the system as a whole
14:52:42 <eBremer> ... an outstanding point
14:53:04 <elf-pavlik> q+ to propose special 1h meeting this week to work on diagrams together
14:53:11 <eBremer> ... we do have a bit of contention that provider could be interannly provided or externally implemented
14:53:24 <eBremer> ... still a few things to work out and another session on the PR
14:53:28 <eBremer> ... intor good for next week
14:53:31 <acoburn> ack next
14:53:32 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to propose special 1h meeting this week to work on diagrams together
14:53:39 <eBremer> s/intor/intro
14:53:58 <eBremer> ekd-pavlik: one hour session to work on those diagrams together
14:54:25 <eBremer> ... provide this feedback next two day to incorporate on one hour session
14:54:36 <acoburn> s/ekd-pavlik:/elf-pavlik:/
14:54:37 <ryey> +1 to consolidation
14:54:42 <eBremer> acoburn: mention on mailing list that would be great
14:55:10 <eBremer> jeremycaine: I could do thursday for the hour meeting
14:55:31 <eBremer> acoburn: reasonable to have vote on introduction next week
14:55:45 <eBremer> ... check on outstanding questions on the diagrams
14:56:41 <eBremer> acoburn: got feedback on json ld context and i will digets some of that into the prs
14:56:50 <jeremycaine> q+
14:56:55 <eBremer> s/digets/digest
14:56:56 <acoburn> ack next
14:57:24 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/lws/calendar/
14:58:29 <acoburn> rrsagent, make minutes
14:58:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/20-lws-minutes.html acoburn
14:59:13 <acoburn> present+ samu
14:59:19 <acoburn> present+ jeswr
14:59:33 <acoburn> rrsagent, make minutes
14:59:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/20-lws-minutes.html acoburn
17:12:23 <klea> klea has joined #lws