data-interoperability-panel
data-interoperability-panel copied to clipboard
solid
Repository for the Solid Data Interoperability Panel
I was thinking about what we are missing to support use of IRIs opaque to the client. Main concern seems to be related to creating new resources. Looking at: https://solid.github.io/data-interoperability-panel/specification/#datareg-create-instance...
Access Invitations will be split into their own specification via #191, but there's a significant amount of refactoring needed on Access Invitations not only to make them sensible in their...
As I understand the current draft, an application would need an Agent's Access Token to retrieve the Agent's Application Registry set. This seems to defeat the purpose of limiting access...
We discussed it shortly during the call today. Authorization Agent provider, for each user they serve would just need create distinct URI which would identify Authorization Agent (instance?) of that...
In [5.2. Data Registration](https://solid.github.io/data-interoperability-panel/specification/#datamodel-data-registration) we find > Each Data Instance is linked via the `ldp:contains` property. In cases where IRI denoting Data Instance has `#` fragment, `ldp:contains` will just link...
Currently we support Agent and Application as distinct types of actors in the interoperability ecosystem. We should consider whether it is useful and/or necessary to add an Organization type. Some...
Add acknowledgements section to specification, primer, and api document.
We should clarify if we will use `Create`, `Update` and `Delete` access mode. I think we should use `Create` if we want to allow creation of new data instances, which...
#130 uses `viaPredicate` to express predicate which directly relates parent to a child, we use it for inherited access. I will link this issue inline in the primer to track...