Meetings

From Solid Community Group
Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Aim

The aim of the Solid specification meeting is to:

  • Discuss suggestions to change the Solid specification
  • Discuss suggestions to change to the Solid test suite
  • Discuss implementations of the Solid specification
  • Discuss Solid roadmap or any other aspect of Solid

Preferably suggestions should be recorded as a pull request or issues to the [Solid specification repository](https://github.com/solid/specification) before being raised at the Solid specification meeting.

instructions

Everybody joins Zoom (see call-in details at each meeting) and http://irc.w3.org/ (pick a username and pick '#solid' as the channel). In irc, there is always one scribe who takes notes of what people are saying. Here are the commands we need to type at each meeting:

(at the start, scribe or admin executes:)

  • /invite zakim #solid
  • /invite rrsagent #solid

(everybody, as needed:)

  • present+ (to be marked as attending in minutes)
  • q+ (to join the speaker queue)
  • q- (to leave the speaker queue)
  • q? (see who's now in the speaker queue)

(at the end, scribe or admin executes:)

  • RRSAgent, please draft minutes
  • RRSAgent, please make log world-readable

Very short must read for everyone: https://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html

Some more details are on https://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent and https://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

20190917_0130CEST

20190912_1600CEST

cancelled

Agenda

  • Update from each of the panels

Action Items

20190905_1000CEST

Agenda

  • Update from each of the panels

Action Items

  • none

20190829_1600CEST

Agenda

  • Update from each of the panels

Action Items

  • reach out to data transfer project to be aware of developments and their relation to Solid conversations

20190822_1000CEST

Agenda

  • Update from each of the panels

Action Items

20190815_1600CEST

Agenda

  • none

Action Items

  • none

20190808_1000CEST

- (James Schoening) have posted some comments on the forum thread and wondering how to get more feedback and in depth discussion. - (JK Reynolds) Explained what the US army group have been working on in relation to Solid, in particular the interoperable weather and calendar app using card x - (Mitzi) Wondering how best to raise the conversation about analysing if users can move between the listed Pods and apps and bring data along and if not identify the reasons

Agenda

  • none

Action Items

  • (Mitzi) schedule a call for the data interoperability panel aiming for next Tuesday
  • (Michiel & Mitzi) look into starting a panel conversation around making it possible for users to switch in between Pods

20190801_1600CEST

- Do expert panels now have authority to merge spec changes that are within their area of expertise, or what is the process for that? In summary the panels put forward proposals in the form of pull requests for the editors to review. The details process is described on https://github.com/solid/culture - When do we kick off the data interoperability panel? Anyone on the panel can start the conversation anywhere as long as it’s public - Where do we want to publish the specification? Entry Panel (Ruben & Sarven) should try and concentrate all the information in the Specification repo and if there are other orthogonal repos that they be linked to - Where do we want to publish the ontologies? Data interoperability panel could propose first where to work i.e. which repo? namespace and vocab? - could they be merged? - Has there been a mash lib deletion? There might just be a glitch for the clean clone or a problem with that specific library? Jackson to have a look into this? - Should the databrowser conventions document have a parallel or link from in solid/vocab or are the schemas in that document a superset of those already listed in vocab? - parallel link? If I were to come across some RDF what’s a good starting point? Databrowser work hasn’t trickled down into the vocab, something the data interoperability panel could make a proposal for?

Agenda

  • do expert panels now have authority to merge spec changes that are within their area of expertise, or what is the process for that?

Action Items

  • Entry Panel to organise the specification repositories to be able to submit proposals to the specification more easily
  • Data Interoperability Panel to decide where they would prefer to work and how to combine the content of various repo

20190724_1000CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • (Max and Sarven) share tools to build website that is with a clean design and linked to a GitHub repo
  • (Mitzi) incorporate feedback into this week in solid edition 2
  • (Mitzi) think further about how to set up a workshop
  • (Mitzi) work through the repos and archive inactive ones

20190718_1600CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • Start the following panels:
- App Authorisation Panel - Michiel
- Data Interoperability Panel - Jim, Justin, Max
- Query Panel - Ruben? 
- Identity Panel - Dmitri, Justin 
- Cryptography Panel - Dmitri, Justin
- Explaining the Vision Panel - Mitzi, Dan? 

20190711_1000CEST

Agenda

Action Items

20190620_1600CEST

Agenda

Action Items

20190613_1000CEST

Agenda

20190606_1600CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • (Jackson) Write the aim, end result, and scope of the project and circulate to recruit project volunteers
  • (Benoit) expand on the issue and raise again next week for further conversation
  • (Mitzi) set up a independent Happy Solid call and Solid repo to apply ethical web standards to Solid

20190530_1000CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • (Mitzi) update decision making process with suggestions

20190523_1600CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • update Solid font to non Google font and move away from the blues
  • change 'will' to 'typically may' in the code of conduct
  • Mitzi and Jeff to connect around the user testing to come up with a proposal

20190516_1000CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • (Mitzi László) try out loomio https://www.loomio.org
  • (Jackson Morgan) document the conversation around the pull requests, in particular the possible routes forward and pros and cons to consider with each route

20190509_1600CEST

Agenda

  • (elf Pavlik) i18n - we discussed a11y on one of the previous calls, we could quickly see who currently puts efforts into i18n
  • (Michiel de Jong) websocket access tickets in the `Updates-Via` header - see https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/issues/44
  • (Michiel de Jong) JSON-LD ACL

Action Items

  • (Mitzi László) set up a team with a task force for accessibility and internationalisation and collect information in a .md including links [recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/09-solid-irc ]
  • (Michiel de Jong) will try making it work with websocket access tickets
  • (Elf Pavlik) send over low hanging fruit issue from 2015 to try the process on
  • (Mitzi László) get a more complete update from Fabian Cook on HTTP Signatures & possible deprecation of WebID + TLS and DDI vs HTTP URI for WebID https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-primer/ to share with the other hemisphere call to make sure we're in sync

20190502_1000CEST

Agenda

Action Items

  • (Mitzi László) include a link from the W3C Solid Wiki to GitHub.com/solid/information and remove doubled up info and encourage others to review the roadmap

IRC log

[09:43] == Mitzi [~Mitzi@public.cloak] has joined #Solid
[09:49] == jonas1 [~jonas@public.cloak] has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
[09:54] <Fabian> Can we have "HTTP Signatures & possible deprecation of WebID + TLS" to the agenda please
[09:55] <Mitzi> can do yes, will add to the agenda
[09:55] <Fabian> As well as DDI vs HTTP URI for WebID
[09:56] <Fabian> Reference https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-primer/
[09:57] <Mitzi> sorted, yes
[09:58] <Fabian> ty
[10:01] == Jackson [~Jackson@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:02] == daphne [~daphne@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:03] == aveltens [~aveltens@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:03] <aveltens> present+
[10:04] <Fabian> I have no idea how to scribe
[10:05] <aveltens> Scribe: aveltens
[10:06] <Fabian> q+
[10:06] <aveltens> Fabian: the proposal of the PR is to make the clientID the acutal redirect URL, to prevent spoofing
[10:06] <Jackson> https://github.com/zenomt/webid-auth-protocol
[10:06] <aveltens> ... there is ongoing discussion
[10:07] <Jackson> https://github.com/zenomt/webid-auth-protocol
[10:08] <aveltens> ... there are some problems that need to be rectified
[10:08] <aveltens> ... we could talk about some of it here
[10:08] <aveltens> ... I want to get in contact with Michael about it
[10:09] <aveltens> Sorry, above was from Jackson
[10:10] <Fabian> q+
[10:12] == jonas [~jonas@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:12] <aveltens> Jackson: Currently we are using the Origin header, but that is easy to spoof
[10:13] == jonas1 [~jonas@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:13] <aveltens> Fabian: We are talking about proof of (?)
[10:13] <aveltens> Jackson: explaining details...
[10:13] <Fabian> proof of possession
[10:14] <Fabian> https://identityserver.github.io/Documentation/docsv2/pop/overview.html
[10:14] <aveltens> Mitzi: Jackson, how do you want to proceed with this?
[10:14] <aveltens> Jackson: Get in touch with Michael and talk about it
[10:14] <aveltens> ... I have a technical implementation, I finished it for the current proposal
[10:15] <aveltens> ... talk to Michael and modifiy the implementation with his proposals
[10:15] <aveltens> https://www.w3.org/community/solid/wiki/Roadmap
[10:18] <aveltens> Topic: Place for solid infomration
[10:18] <Fabian> q+
[10:18] <aveltens> aveltens: Information e.g. about apps is split up between wiki and github
[10:19] == jonas [~jonas@public.cloak] has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
[10:19] <aveltens> Proposal: Put everything on github and remove redundant information from wiki
[10:20] == ewingson [~ewingson@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:20] == timbl [timbl@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:23] <Fabian> q+
[10:23] <Mitzi> https://github.com/shingyeung/contrib/
[10:23] == timbl [timbl@public.cloak] has quit ["My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…"]
[10:23] <aveltens> Mitzi: Shingyeung is not present to talk about the self-hosting instruction, but it's good to have it
[10:24] <ewingson> yes thats very detailed for raspberry pi
[10:24] <aveltens> ... it would be great if others could review it and give feedback, tips, tricks
[10:24] <aveltens> Fabian: I will be happy to write some as well
[10:25] <aveltens> Mitzi: There is a lot of work on this front, this would be amazing
[10:26] <aveltens> Topic: Solid Roadmap
[10:26] == timbl [timbl@public.cloak] has joined #solid
[10:26] <Mitzi> want to encourage people to add what they are up to on the list
[10:26] <Mitzi> for example what Jackson mentioned earlier
[10:27] <Mitzi> could go through the topics to make sure they are up to date
[10:27] <Mitzi> Daphne - working on the ui/ux
[10:27] <Jackson> q+1
[10:28] <Jackson> q+
[10:30] <ewingson> has the server running and is finetuning
[10:30] <Mitzi> need to ensure that the roadmap is up to date and that is something everyone will need to engage with
[10:31] <Mitzi> need to reflect our actions in the roadmap and remove inactive items to make it valuable
[10:32] <Mitzi> link to Solid projects
[10:33] <Mitzi> Jackson - inrupt list needs updating
[10:33] <Mitzi> what about ideal scenario items?
[10:33] <Mitzi> angelo - yes, especially if it's in the short term (not next decade)
[10:34] <aveltens> Topic: HTTP Signatures & possible deprecation of WebID + TLS
[10:34] <Mitzi> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-primer/
[10:34] <aveltens> Fabian: WebID+TLS is not working anymore since NSS 5
[10:35] <Mitzi> Fabian: do we use the transport layer? or should we use the strategy of http signatures?
[10:36] <aveltens> Jackson: nothing is official until it's pulled into the spec, but there are discussions and it is currently broken in the server
[10:36] <aveltens> ... discussions are to remove WebID+TLS in favor of OIdC
[10:36] <Mitzi> Jackson: current version in server is not compliant to the spec, there have been conversations around this although need to write them down more formally
[10:37] <Fabian> q+
[10:39] <Mitzi> Fabian: what we are trying to do with Solid is allow individuals to pick how to store their data
[10:39] <Mitzi> Fabian: an identity provider is an additional component
[10:40] <Mitzi> Fabian: if we decentralise and then centralise them again, seems the wrong way around
[10:40] <csarven> Is there a meeting going on right now or are you folks just chatting?
[10:41] <Mitzi> Hi Sarven, yes, come join via https://www.w3.org/community/solid/wiki/Meetings
[10:41] <Fabian> q+
[10:41] <csarven> Thanks, I can't.. but just some things in the chat here caught my eye..
[10:42] <csarven> Just want to raise the point that whether some mechanism in a *particular* implementation is "broken" is not grounds for removal to be removed from the spec.
[10:42] <Mitzi> Fabian: I think we can achieve this without a centralised provider
[10:43] <csarven> What may be grounds for removal is.. taking backwards compatibility into account, checking whether it is at all supported out there etc..
[10:43] <csarven> We don't just rip off sections of a spec because some part of a specific tool is not maintained.
[10:45] <Mitzi> Jackson: we assume we trust idp
[10:45] <Mitzi> Jackson: there are questions in terms of supporting multiple ways to login
[10:45] <Fabian> q+
[10:47] <Mitzi> Fabian: Using web credentials is still a draft. The ideal solution would be to key peer on my machine and signed it and sent it off
[10:47] <Mitzi> Fabian: if that could be the authentication that would be the ideal solution because I could dictate how my apps are working
[10:48] <csarven> And before even talking about alternative identifiers... well, show that the alternative works - multiple implementation independently developed.
[10:48] <csarven> Without that.. there is not hing on the table. Hypothetical discussion that is not particularly good use of time (IMHO)
[10:52] <Fabian> q+ after this topic
[10:53] <Mitzi> Mitzi: will set up a .md file where we can collect ideas for an agenda for the December face-to-face
[10:54] <Mitzi> Jackson: would be satisfactory to support DID
[10:54] <Fabian> q+
[10:57] <Mitzi> Fabian: faced with similar problems with chat moderation
[10:57] <daphne> q
[10:58] <Mitzi> Fabian: need to just say something rather than blocking
[11:00] <Fabian> I wont be there this time! Catch ya all in a couple weeks
[11:01] == daphne [~daphne@public.cloak] has quit ["Page closed"]
[11:01] <Mitzi> Thanks everyone, see you next time, will make sure there are minutes so we can stay in sync
[11:01] <ewingson> thanks cya soon
[11:02] == ewingson [~ewingson@public.cloak] has quit ["Page closed"]

20190425_1600CEST

Agenda

  • (Angelo V) Pick a location for Solid wiki information
  • (Shingyeung) Present self hosting instructions on https://github.com/shingyeung/contrib/ for feedback and invitation to collaborate
  • (elf Pavlik) Decide on location for feedback channel from all the pioneers already running NSS and what to include in simple surveys e.g. Where do you terminate TLS? Do you keep WebID-TLS available? etc. Later it would also make it easier to create directory like https://fediverse.network/
  • (Mitzi Laszlo) Decide on criteria to be included as a Solid specifications contributor https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/pull/155 and https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/pull/42 and https://github.com/solid/webid-oidc-spec/pull/17
  • (Angelo V) Review roadmap
  • (Sina Bahram) Discuss how to ensure accessibility of Solid across the community e.g. where to post information on this topic
  • (Fabian Cook) Discuss conformance testing on a solid compatible implementation. This could also be ran on NSS itself to ensure no breaking changes over time. This could also extend to user interfaces to only include apps with a specific accessibility level to have them approved as conformed to the specification. AKA solid defines that all information should be accessible to all whether it be a human knowing specific communication mediums (visual, audio, touch [e.g. braille]), or machines knowing specific communication medums (https, wss, turtle, json+ld) etc
  • (Jackson Morgan) Present https://github.com/solid/webid-oidc-spec/pull/16

Action Items

20190411_1400CEST

Agenda

note: potential to connect with Solid Spec Pull Request milestones https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/milestone/1 and https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/milestone/1 and Spring Cleaning of Issues from 2015 milestone https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/milestone/2 with plan to work in reverse chronological order

  • (Mitzi László) Housekeeping: Are there any objections to switching calls to two hours later seeing as the European daylight savings is making these calls very early for participants in the Americas?

Action Items

  • (Mitzi) List at the start of the spec editor & contributors (per spec) at the start.
  • (Elf-Pavlik to lead) adding notes in the spec on trusted apps and delegation

20190404_1400CEST

Agenda

There are 85 open issues and pull requests on the Solid specifications. The agenda is to work through them one by one and decide on a route forward. The person who opened the pull request or issue will be responsible for presenting the pending items that need to be decided together. If there is a difference of opinion the Solid Specifications Repository Manager will decide on the route forward. Please prepare for the meeting by making a summary of the decisions that need to be made including the routes forward and pros and cons of each of those routes.

Action Items

  • (Mitzi László) make sure there is a label for typos which do not need to go through the official process
  • (Mitzi László) pass the issues and pull requests that were presented to the Solid Specification Repository Manager to review
  • (Alex Bourlier) to open a pull request on URL encoding

20190328_1400CET

Agenda

  • Data collections, trusted apps UX, server ideas (Michiel)
  • Housekeeping: - proposal to move specs to github/w3c-solid - proposal to review email purpose of public-conv@w3.org, public-solid-contrib@w3c.org, internal-solid@w3c.org and suggestion to include solid-spec@ pod-provider@ solid-app@ developer-tools@? - conversation about how to reach the current chairs to be able to update the links - Invitation to review of Solid Solutions on the w3c wiki - invitation for user testing interviews - invitation to write a report (Mitzi)
  • Proposal to draw up a Solid roadmap for the next few weeks/ months (Angelo)
  • Proposed an addition to the Web Access Control specification to assist systems that cache authorisations, and possibly other uses https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/pull/37 (Kjetil)
  • Proposal to add a test suite repo (Kjetil)

Action Items

  • Define a place to follow up the conversation on trusted apps (Michiel)

- Set out the roadmap on the w3c wiki (Angelo) - Lead the development of the test suite (Kjetil)

20190321_1300CET

Agenda

  • ShEx potential in Solid spec (Eric)
  • Shapes potential in Solid spec (Ruben)
  • DID potential in Solid spec (Dmitri)
  • Discuss possibility of Solid Design Requirements Specification in particular the potential for defining the default data sharing settings in such a way that the user is protected while able to engage at a minimum level. (Mitzi)

Action Items

  • New spec repository to detail interoperability between DID and WebID (Dmitri)
  • New spec repository to detail the default setting point (Mitzi)
  • Meetings to happen weekly rather than biweekly (Mitzi)
  • Start the Solid World podcast to communicate the W3C Solid Community Group conversations externally (Mitzi)

20190307_1400CET

Agenda

  • Review agenda and invitation to suggest additional items to the agenda as well as explaining to use q+ via irc.w3.org for ordering
  • Introductions by new people joining
  • Define the goal of the Solid
- Testing and reaching consensus about proposed changes to Solid
- Sharing best practices regarding Solid standards implementation
- Mutualising open-source code helping to implement Solid standards
- Sharing business opportunities
- Finding Solid knowledgeable teammates, maybe via a directory of skills based on Solid
- Organizing online and IRL meetings of Solid community
  • Decide on frequency of recurring calls
  • Decide on preferred chat channels and purpose of each e.g. mailing list and gitter
  • Decide is we would like to work towards drafting a charter to become a working group
  • List initiatives that we love and why we love them and begin to place them into how could fit into the Solid specs
- Web components: Solid enables the happening of a world where monopolistic web applications are replaced by a myriad of federated applications. That implies that many companies will end up creating their own tool instead of using centralized ones.
- Mutualization of open-source code to build those apps becomes a priority so that the financial cost of shifting to a decentralized world doesn’t stand in the way. Web components are the best mean of reusing code between applications in a technical agnostic way. With Solid, web components can be assembled into our web applications, in a simple plugin system requiring no technical skills.
  • List suggestions for sub specs or areas of the spec to work on
- App registration (Dmitri) 
- ShEx potential in solid (Eric)
- App based permission 
- How to give third-party app less than full root permissions, how to use SHACL shapes to improve interoperability, growing the Solid users community (so not just enthusiasts and developers, but actual user base of the platform)
- Social graphing
- Cross-server tests project 
 -  Group uris spec and chat prototype I made some years ago for solid https://melvincarvalho.github.io/groupuris/ (Melvin)
- Solid Proxy How are decentralised assets currently being handled?  Therein consideration of search & discovery, in addition perhaps to some sort of underlying solid-proxy (Timo) 
- Smart Agent. There have been a few issues highlighted about ontologies; a. how to find them b. how to make them c. how to map between them. Secondly, i think that there will be more inputs to a 'smart agent' than is defined more simply as 'ontology'. Perhaps a 'smart agent' is the AI equivalent to a web-browser for humans.  question moreover is, how does it work; what are the prevailing considerations about how it should work (and what it shouldn't be able to do if it 'conforms to spec'.) (Timo)
- Client side OIDC registration
- LDP multiple resources posting
- Business ontologies standardisation
- PATCH syntax