Sarven Capadisli

Noting here that I am editing some comments in this repo to change references to solidproject.org from github.io where applicable. Motivation is to reduce potential references to URLs that's not...

No judgement on prettiness but by changing the link context, this should be equivalent: `Link: ; anchor="... container/"; rel="... ldp#contains"`

Whether to have a spec version or a living standard is dependent on https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/8 . Whether there is a 1:1 mapping between a spec version (if there is one) and...

Adding to above: 1. Linked to https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/163 earlier which already references WebSocket for consideration - so it wasn't overlooked. Note: https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/issues/221#issuecomment-619054585 2. Dependent on #8 . The specs are intended...

The HTTP headers pertaining to LDPC for Solid-servers and LDP-servers are the same. https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/128#issuecomment-573033297 is intended to ensure that consistency.

The `WAC-Allow` header is defined here https://solidproject.org/TR/wac#wac-allow . See also https://solidproject.org/TR/wac#client-wac-allow ). >An example use case could maybe be an inbox, to which everyone has append permission but only the...

>Is this an example of what the unauthenticated client would receive on an OPTIONS request? As per https://solidproject.org/ED/protocol#server-accept-headers , the server includes `Accept-*` headers when client is authorized. The example...

>My apologies if it might seem that I'm being difficult No need to apologise. You're not being difficult. I take it as input to consider improvements. It partly follows https://github.com/solid/specification/pull/378#discussion_r801616487...

Server always has the right to reject requests if unable to process contained instructions, including cases in which constraints are not met, such as protected information in order for the...

https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol#constraints-problem-details