Agenda for 2024-09-04 CG meeting (#680)

* Agenda for 2024-09-04 CG meeting * Updated minutes for the 2024-09-04 CG meeting * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Virginia Balseiro <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> * Update meetings/2024-09-04.md Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Virginia Balseiro <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
solid · Sep 6, 2024 · 46eac4c · 46eac4c
1 parent 96f5ea5
commit 46eac4c
Showing 1 changed file with 131 additions and 0 deletions.
diff --git a/meetings/2024-09-04.md b/meetings/2024-09-04.md
@@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
+# W3C Solid Community Group: Weekly
+
+* Date: 2024-09-04T14:00:00Z
+* Call: https://meet.jit.si/solid-cg
+* Chat: https://matrix.to/#/#solid_specification:gitter.im
+* Repository: https://github.com/solid/specification
+* Status: Published
+
+
+## Present
+
+* Hadrian Zbarcea
+* [Rahul Gupta](https://cxres.pages.dev/profile#i)
+* [elf Pavlik](https://elf-pavlik.hackers4peace.net)
+* [Pierre-Antoine Champin](https://champin.net/#pa)
+* Willem Datema
+* Maxime Lecoq-Gaillard
+* [Sarven Capadisli](https://csarven.ca/#i) (joined 14:15 UTC)
+* Grace Elcock
+* Tim Berners-Lee
+* Rui Zhao
+
+---
+
+
+## Announcements
+
+### Meeting Guidelines
+* [W3C Solid Community Group Calendar](https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/solid/calendar).
+* [W3C Solid Community Group Meeting Guidelines](https://github.com/w3c-cg/solid/blob/main/meetings/README.md).
+* No audio or video recording, or automated transcripts without consent. Meetings are transcribed and made public. If consent is withheld by anyone, recording/retention must not occur.
+* Join queue to talk.
+* Topics can be proposed at the bottom of the agenda to be discussed as time allows. Make it known if a topic is urgent or cannot be postponed.
+
+### Participation and Code of Conduct
+* [Join the W3C Solid Community Group](https://www.w3.org/community/solid/join), [W3C Account Request](http://www.w3.org/accounts/request), [W3C Community Contributor License Agreement](https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/cla/).
+* [Solid Code of Conduct](https://github.com/solid/process/blob/main/code-of-conduct.md), [Positive Work Environment at W3C: Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct](https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/)
+* Operating principle for effective participation is to allow access across disabilities, across country borders, and across time. Feedback on tooling and meeting timing is welcome.
+* If this is your first time, welcome! please introduce yourself.
+
+### Scribes
+
+* elf Pavlik
+
+---
+
+## Topics
+
+### WG Status
+
+* PAC: AC did the review a few hours ago; there were no formal objections. There are still a few steps, but there is nothing standing in the way. The objections on the previous charter didn't pop back up, and there was appreciation of our work on the new charter. 25 member organizations supported and 7 abstained. I have the meeting with chairs on ... and we will talk about TPAC. Too late for an official face-to-face, but probably we will have a breakout session.
+* RG: First of all congratulations and thank your for all the hard work. May we combine CG session at TPAC?
+* PAC: The scopes of the groups are similar. 
+* HZ: Last year we needed 22 votes, now it is only 18. We got 25. I think membership of W3C is shrinking. We weren't sure about Mozilla. Are there any opportunities to work with Mozilla and strengthen our relationship?
+* PAC: It was ok to cite them; their review is public. They abstained and didn't announce an intention to participate in the working group. We can still reach out. This is an opportunity to try to get more traction and more adoption. They appreciated that we increased the number of groups with whom we want to liaise. They may still interact indirectly via those groups.
+* eP: There are opportunities; for example, collaboration with Social CG.
+* HZ: This is a culmination of years of work; this validates the work done in the CG. I think that the CG stopped progressing in the last year. Now we should have counterparts in the WG to cooperate with the CG. Thank you everyone, especially PAC; I know this was a grinding and stressful effort.
+* PAC: Thank you all, this was a group effort.
+* RG: Can we have a discussion about how we are going to liaise with the WG, how we make contacts, etc?
+* PAC: First of all, WG in general work largely in the open and publicly. The mailing list will be open; the github repository will be public. Minutes are published as well. The only thing that is not entirely open are the WG calls which are reserved to W3C members and invited experts. Also, the WG decisions are made by WG members. Again, any member of CG should be able to chime in. WG members can join CG meetings, with their WG hats on. Also WG can invite people for specific meetings. Even if there is this boundary, the process is still very, very open.
+* SC: I'm curious about what do you mean Hadrian when you say that the progress in the CG "stopped" in the last year. Which progress do you mean and what do you see as the reason?
+* HZ: I should have said that it slowed down. A lot of focus was on procedures. One big unknown was the dependency on WebID. In July, the WebID CG was closed by W3C. Now there is no work on WebID. Many issues haven't been addressed in the last year. So there was a slow down, not a hard stop. In my opinion, waiting for the WG was a factor here.
+* SC: Honestly, I don't quite follow that thought process.
+* SC: Some of the key specs received updates, and even a new version of the Solid Protocol was released. There were also CG-DRAFTs. I can agree with you on "slowing down" but only about lacking implementation experience. There were a lot of calls about implementation experience and commitments to implement. Considering the number of active participants to the number of implementers, it doesn't seem to add up. There is a difference between what is visible to the CG and what is visible on the outside. What's communicated out there. Some individuals and organizations may be claiming implementing the Solid Protocol but without providing feedback to the CG. Or claiming things that are part of the Solid Protocol or related, or coming from the Solid CG or being a "standard" but that is not true. There is nothing on record as such. I can agree that the CG slowed down but I think that was due to the lack of implementation feedback. And the whole point was for us to strengthen incubation towards the WG. I'm curious to see how implementation experience will come up out of thin air in the WG. Besides that we had a number of updates to the specifications.
+* HZ: I agree with you, there may be other factors like (???)
+* eP: There is no objective way to measure it, in my subj.
+* PAC: I don't have an answer, when Sarven asks if implementation experience will increase. From my experience, some organizations are cautious with technologies which are not on the REC track.
+* SC: This is a very likely scenario. As far as the communication, there are things being supposedly implemented but it isn't communicated in the CG.
+* HZ: This topic was mostly about the announcement and celebrating it.
+* HZ: As for implementations, we have Manas and ActivityPods which were very active in last year. I think there are also implementations on the Solid server side.
+* eP: We have feedback; for example, https://forum.solidproject.org/t/solid-interop-in-practice/7701
+* TBL: ... 
+
+
+### TPAC Demos
+
+* VB (not present, via HackMD): All good. Demos will be published soon.
+* SC: I have more general concern about communication with respect to https://github.com/w3c-cg/solid/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#communication . Even when I was chair, I approached that whether what I say out there is my own opinion or it represents the CG's findings. I think this is important to make sure that you have consent from the group about what you are communicating. There is a difference between something being presented as one's own opinion or more neutral perspective. Whether that will be capture or not, we still need to be cautious about that. This is important for chairs and everyone.
+* TBL: I was thinking that we get a bunch of people, and we talk about Solid; I try to understand what failure are you worrying about. Is it about distinguishing the output of the group from other outputs? Are you worrying that people will present different uses? Or is it about misrepresenting the wishes of the group?
+* SC: It is expressing things that are being worked on by the group or something built by individuals or organizations. They can say it is Solid but it might not be worked on in the CG. If the work is presented in the way where it is a subset of the work, or captures aspects of the work which aren't belonging. For example excluding some key parts of the specification when communicating but including other parts which have nothing to do with it.
+* HZ: I have similar comment that Tim has. I also want to ask, what do you propose?
+* SC: There were some concerns raised about the videos. It is not particular to demos. Mostly, how do we communicate externally.
+* HZ: Communication is never perfect; even PR may not represent the consensus. 
+* eP: 
+* HZ: Every community requires a level of trust
+* RG: While I'm for having ... communication. Sometimes a person feels strongly about something, and they should be able to express it, but keep it polite.
+* HZ: ..
+* RG: Some discussions have to be done in public. We shouldn't be surpressing it.
+* eP: ...
+* 
+
+#### TPAC Agenda
+
+* VB (not present, via HackMD): Preparing agenda. Please suggest topics. 
+* HZ: I don't know how we can make it actionable
+* TBL: The last one we had it was a bit dysfunctional. Most of the people there had no idea what Solid was; it had to be an introduction. Then we had some discussion among the group participants. We could say that this is not going to be a tutorial. If you want to come, review the website and understand first. Or, we can find out who people are, and decide agenda based on that.
+* SC: re "dysfunctional": https://github.com/solid/specification/blob/main/meetings/2023-09-11.md
+* SC: I chaired that, not sure about the dysfunctional
+* TBL: Yes, it is too strong. It had big problems in trying to be two meetings at once.
+* HZ: I was there; the room was too small, and there was some confusion.
+* SC: No one helped me with putting the agenda together. I tried my best given the circumstances, Henry's passing, covering CG charter — which was new and important — WG charter proposal, etc. If the point is that people should have been better prepared, or should we have walked through all the CG reports, possibly. Those were not particularly more important than what we covered in the meeting.
+* TBL: I'm sorry, it was not a personal attack on the chair.
+* RG: Do we have any idea of how many of the people who will be there know Solid, and how many not? We need to know the audience.
+* HZ: I don't think we may have much idea. We can set our expectations well.
+* eP: ...
+* HZ: There is an opportunity to liaise with other groups present.
+* SC: We had Hybrid meetings for some years at TPAC. A lot of groups are doing hybrid meetings. For accessibility reason it is important to allow that opportunity. As eP said, we have meetings for the big part of the year online. If the people want to join and gather in the room they should be able to do that. More the merrier.
+* 
+
+### Permalinks
+
+* eP: There is the issue of coupling URLs with access control, where initial decisions about what the resource is inheriting from can't be changed without changing the URL. We most likely need to document which use cases and requirements are being satisfied by the current approach; this way we can look at other possible approaches and make sure that they still provide the same behavior. If that's impossible, then we will at least see what specific tradeoffs we need to choose from.
+* RG: One thing that happened, in Solid notifications and in PREP, the access control situation became very important. You don't want to compute it every time you are sending notification to each client. With notifications in the picture, it has to be kept in mind.
+* TBL: I find the correlation between things in the containers and access control useful. The apps that I write use that. It is useful to have access control follow containers you are in. If you don't want to use containers, dont't use containers. What I'm trying to find, if you find access control to be a pain in your applications, when people rearrange the stuff. Are you imagining that people have things in the containers and that they will move them between containers? The present system works prety well.
+* HZ: To me, it is nothing to do with a container; this is confusion of identity and adresses.
+* SC: I understand why it is interesting about moving stuff, but that is not what the Web Architecture says about moving things. When the URI owner allocates a URI to a resource, they commit to it being on the Web. It is a promise when sharing. Like they can be linked to, bookmarked, and they may announce a persistent policy. If you want to move it, there are things like redirects.
+* HZ: In this case, you have the service provider in the middle. 
+* eP: When I say move it, I don't want to change the URL, but move it to a different access control context.
+* SC: There is a difference in knowledge organization, e.g., putting things into different containers.
+* TBL: Just don't use containers.
+
+### Integrating with SASL for webid authentication
+URL: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/628
+
+### Access Delegation
+URL: https://github.com/solid/data-interoperability-panel/issues/222
+URL: https:/hackmd.io/@elf-pavlik/HJoZ62ERh
+(continuation from last week)
+
+* eP: I would prefer to push it to the next meeting
+