– DRAFT –
Linked Web Storage

Introduction & Announcements

TPAC is 2.5 mo away

early sign up has passed

remote option will be available

<elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/news-events/tpac/2026/registration/#registration

TPAC Agenda Issue#176

acoburn: we have number of slots, but don't need to figure out agenda today

<elf-pavlik> #176

acoburn: issue 176, general thoughts for the agenda e.g. what are things we need to do
… to get to CR status
… e.g. test suite; call for implementors

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to ask about the est suite

elf-pavlik: Jesse was suggest new task force around test suite

Rbreitman: not heard from Jesse; will ask for status

acoburn: generally get test suite every 3rd week - next is 17th aug - ideally Shamu would attend

<elf-pavlik> we should coordinate with lws-contrib/lws-test-suite

acoburn: we are pretty far along (the spec) so we need to move on testing
… (tpac) are we feature complete? it's harder after CR status
… adding entirely new features is harder
… what options do we have for deliverables
… REC -e.g protocol spec ; authn suites etc
… WG note: does not have normative status e.g. like threat model, use case docs
… docs whose intention is not REC track, but is normative
… permanent Candidate Recommendation
… REC vs CR - where does web hook, notifications and so on go
… WG Note is not viable for those normative statements

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to ask how does it fit with admin extension and later recharter

elf-pavlik: do we do CR during timeline extensions

acoburn: this is in flux
… we will ask for administrative extensions - about 4 mo
… give us WG time, after Sep 2026
… extension ends when new charter starts
… could start Nov 2026, maybe more likely Jan/Feb 2027
… CR would be in the new charter
… relative date is charter start plus one month
… e.g. if new charter starts Jan, then CR starts Feb

FPWD for notification-webhook & LWS index

acoburn: notification and index are not on w3c website
… for a first public working draft needs a vote - target 17th aug -

Discussion: Remove AS dependency for container data model PR#219

acoburn: hoping to vote on this next week 17th
… this PR remaps activity streams vocab to new vocab
… we already have an lws vocab

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to suggest raising an issue with Social WG

elf-pavlik: raise an issue as to why we can't reuse these terms

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to comment on domain/range

elf-pavlik: mostly affects people who run listeners

acoburn: there are other vocabs too

eBremer: dcterms ?

acoburn: yes - will fix in PR - dct = dcterms

elf-pavlik: can reach out to Social WG, but would prefer help

Discussion: lws:StorageResource terminology Issue#220

acoburn: another gap in feature set
… LWS Storage Resource not defined in LWS vocab
… 3 options with pro/cons
… no PR, but get sense from group via issue

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to ask how access request is using it

<gibsonf1> option 4 - include LWS in the term so there is no jsonLd conflict

elf-pavlik: access request target defn
… (example 15)

acoburn: need to specify target in an access request (example 15)

elf-pavlik: diff between data resource vs container resource

elf-pavlik: type could be an array

acoburn: type could be an array
… currently it allows for access for any type

gibsonf1: simplest term is LWSResource
… little chance of conflict
… as a 4th option

<elf-pavlik> my main point is that we need to clarify semantics first before finalizing the name

termontwouter: prefer something before Resource
… could we just add to terminology section that LWS Storage Resource is shortened to LWS Resource?
… key concern is its a feature hole
… next step, team please comment so we can take forward

Status of WebSocket / SSE / Streaming Fetch for notifications PR#162

acoburn: old PR, what is status laurens?

laurens: probably needs to be closed
… end of august, goal for new PR to resolve and close #162

<gb> PR 162 feat(notifications): Add WebSocket and Server-Sent Event channels (by laurensdeb) [notifications]

elf-pavlik: i'm looking at RDF messages
… RDF could be optional
… what is motivation, several topics to be discussed

acoburn: how long to resolve this? ... next month or into Fall

laurens: are the solid issues in the PR?

<elf-pavlik> w3c/lws-protocol#66

<gb> Issue 66 Solid Compatibility / Migration Work Item (by acoburn) [needs-discussion] [work-item]

<acoburn> https://github.com/jeswr/lws-solid-diff/blob/main/DIFF.md

laurens: choices made in past meeting in Ghent
… I'll check and get back to this
… many ideas in Solid protocol have not been implemented

Volunteers for ETag & Slug header text changes

laurens: created action item

acoburn: open a PR and then vote next week 17th
… AOB?
… US hol 7th Sep - Labor Day
… can we cancel that day?

<Zakim> gibsonf, you wanted to ask about Read operation

gibsonf1: current spec, have begun implementation

acoburn: needs a discussion on media types
… start at storage resource, then root container, what are media types in the container
… alt. if you have URL but cannot find parent, do a HEAD requests, see type ... use that to proceed with content neg

gibsonf1: at scale, there will be a lot of requests

<elf-pavlik> w3c/lws-protocol#188 (comment)

<gb> Issue 188 Create reference explaining consistent use of HTTP content-type, profile, prefer etc. (by elf-pavlik) [editorial]

acoburn: can continue gibsonf1 implementation discussion

<elf-pavlik> ericP: w3c/lws-protocol#113 (comment) ?

<gb> PR 113 Support for auxiliary resources and manifest (#67) (by damooo) [metadata]