Michiel de Jong

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 https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/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 https://github.com/inrupt/pod-server/issues/15 as "what I call current Solid".

Ah, and I think the TLS-bridge requirement from https://github.com/solid/webid-oidc-spec/pull/26#issuecomment-506347607 / https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/pull/171/files#diff-04c6e90faac2675aa89e2176d2eec7d8R126-R127 was also not copied over, right? ## Changelog from 0.8 to 0.9 So to summarize (`[-]` is feature no...

Also heard a rumour that deletes may become recursive, see https://github.com/solid/specification/blob/editors-draft/main/introduction.bs#L23

@ianbjacobs the list of draft reports I filled in on https://www.w3.org/community/solid/ during our meeting today was a copy of https://solidproject.org/TR/#work-items But since then I got a message from @VirginiaBalseiro saying...

See [comment in MatterMost](https://mattermost.incubateur.net/ota/pl/sbf67e3c7tybmywthztfa31q6c) from @Ndpnt

I think a small step to make would be to remove `sharedSecret` from the payload and instead put in a nonce, which could be equivalent to the `code` in the...

The main change to our protocol would be https://github.com/cs3org/OCM-API/pull/98 The framing of the spec text would help OCM be less exotic and get more potential adoption. I think the thing...

I'll re-read https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-gnap-core-protocol/ and see what OCM would add to GNAP.