think of a good relation id for privilege-request-protocol's x-permission-request link

[zenomt]

currently privilege-request-protocol.md uses x-permission-request as a placeholder for the link relation type for the privilege request endpoint URI.

let's think of a good link relation type. i believe this should be an Extention Relation Type URI rather than a simple registered relation name, so that coordination with the IANA won't be necessary (also they require a stable specification document to reference). perhaps something in @prefix solid: <http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#>?

there's already solid:loginEndpoint and solid:logoutEndpoint. perhaps

• http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#privilegeRequestEndpoint
• http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#permissionRequestEndpoint
• your suggestion here

[RubenVerborgh]

As per https://github.com/solid/app-authorization-panel/issues/27, I do not think the endpoint-centric nature of Privilege Request Protocol is a design that matches Solid.

We should avoid creating link relations for "endpoints", as they are not domain concepts within Solid. Although these exist for login and logout, those are for use with existing protocols that we did not define, and which do have the "endpoint" notion. (We still might to revise that, but this is another topic.)

If a suggestion such as https://github.com/solid/app-authorization-panel/issues/27 is followed, the link relation would be solid:permissionRequestInbox (or similar), subproperty of ldp:inbox. In case no solid:permissionRequestInbox is found for a resource, the regular ldp:inbox can be used.