W3C Solid Community Group: Weekly

Date: 2024-02-14T14:00:00Z
Call: https://meet.jit.si/solid-cg
Chat: https://matrix.to/#/#solid_specification:gitter.im
Repository: https://github.com/solid/specification
Status: Published

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

Join the W3C Solid Community Group, W3C Account Request, W3C Community Contributor License Agreement.
Solid Code of Conduct, Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
Operating principle for effective participation is to allow access across disabilities, across country borders, and across time. Feedback on tooling and meeting timing is welcome.
If this is your first time, welcome! please introduce yourself.

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 has been addressed, some objections can be argued in front of the council.
HZ: I recall that only one objection Sarven was considering valid. It was related to the chair selection. There was also something about the scope and the explainer. Tim has alredy 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 spect rubber stamped. Someone mentioned that Solid has been mentioned 15 times. We should have been more careful about it. 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 extend we can remove the use of term Solid? This could involve the name of the group. That would address a lot of concerns about rubber stampping.
PAC: +1, the only problem is comming 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 a three bullet points of what it tries to acomplish, 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 UCR document, it is common to have it as 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 Practicioners group. There are four speakers …
eP: We can make online polls for cg weekly and stm
AC: Some groups have rotating schedule, this can be also considered.
RG: The problem with Wednesdays is that there are two other meetings afterwards. If we push it two hours ahead this will confilict with other meetings.
TBL: SolidOS meets after this meeting

Co-chairs Rotation Schedule

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/discussions/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 a 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 schedul a bunch of them and send out invites, people will RSVP
RG: …

Add security consideration for serving user-created files

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/pull/598
(outstanding: ACTION: eP to make PR with security threat use cases and capture one discussed in the PR)

eP: where to add the new info? can we add it to https://solid.github.io/authorization-panel/authorization-ucr/
HZ: it should probably be a separate document, or separate section
HZ: potential security threats
RG: security considerations
AC: security best practices, for example OAuth2 document addresses very specific know threats https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-oauth-security-topics
eP: ok i will go with that

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

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/pull/608
(outstanding: eP: Bring it back next week when Sarven will present)

DONE

Quick Notifications

URL: https://github.com/solid/notifications/pull/192
(outstanding: RG: (Announcement Only) Request for reviews!)

RH: please take a look!
eP: has HTML diff improved?
RH: There have been some improvements done

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 is also uri normalization and iri, how should we address them?

Specify container description

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/227

see above

Server Description

URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/355
(outstanding: setup STM)