-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Document changelog from "roughly-0.8" to "Dec-2019" #135
Comments
Not breaking the client-server interaction per se, but breaking for how users expect app permissions to work: This means a user should (find a way to) use |
There is no Dec-2019 document, because we were told it is more important to reach rough consensus on as much as possible than produce a document. The only thing that has been decided to the process so far is to remove globbing. Remove SPARQL-on-GET happened before, but I guess it is in a similar situation. #77 still has the "Under discussion" status, as no rough consensus text has been proposed, and it is up to the panel to propose it. |
Ooops, hit the wrong button. :-) |
So from what I can see, those 5 are the main changes between the roughly-0.8 version we tagged in July, and the "December 2019" version we're tagging today. |
At some level you could say #115 is a sixth one, although it will probably go down in history as a clarification and not a breaking change. |
So for my own notes, I'll consider this right here as "current Solid", starting today. Just like until today I used inrupt/pod-server#15 as "what I call current Solid". |
Ah, and I think the TLS-bridge requirement from solid/webid-oidc-spec#26 (comment) / https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/pull/171/files#diff-04c6e90faac2675aa89e2176d2eec7d8R126-R127 was also not copied over, right? Changelog from 0.8 to 0.9So to summarize ( For storage servers:
For websockets-pubsub server:
For IDPs:
For app developersIIUC, for app developers (as a result), this means:
|
Issues I have with the changes
|
I haven't participated in the auth* work directly, but that seems to be about it. I do note that the REST API documentation is very sparse, and that we know that NSS doesn't conform to LDP, and that |
I think we should always stay very clear which case of 'log on' we discuss
While for 1. we probably can leave it up to OP to use whatever it wants. For the rest we want to have one common mechanism evolving from WebID-OIDC in Authentication and Authorization Panels.
This comes into play in case 4. from my previous point. IMO direction which gets strongest consensus would give this responsibility to OP, which would ensure respecting user's privacy while still giving user full control over how much of their access they want to delegate to each application. |
I've just created PR attempting to clarify that WebID-TLS doesn't play any more a special role in solid ecosystem #140 |
Also heard a rumour that deletes may become recursive, see https://github.com/solid/specification/blob/editors-draft/main/introduction.bs#L23 |
I suggest to close this issue. Will label with "Waiting Commenter" for the time being prior to closing. https://solidproject.org/TR/2021/protocol-20211217 (Version 0.9) is taken to be the first published version of the specification that went through some process/group/team deliberation. It does not have a change log because the diff is not straight forward to produce or necessarily observable. While documentation prior to v0.9 exists, they weren't "specifications" in the common sense. We had to draw the line somewhere. That aside, if a change log along the lines of https://solidproject.org/ED/protocol#change-log can be produced for https://solidproject.org/TR/2021/protocol-2021121 , we can consider adding it. |
Please document the changelog from the
roughly-0.8
version to theDec-2019
version. It may be useful to categorize the changes by if and how they require action from server- and/or client- implementers:roughly-0.8
server incompatible with aDec-2019
clientroughly-0.8
client incompatible with aDec-2019
server@csarven @kjetilk is this list correct?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: