Repository navigation
Generalise the containment expectation in the context of Solid #14
Description
Think out loud...
I think this spec need not be overly limited to LDP containment per se even in the context of Solid.
Express things in a way where it'd be compatible with both LDP Containment as well as ActivityStream Collections.
In other words, while this spec can be "Solid-PREP" but it'll still be compatible in an ActivityPub environment, or even Solid environment that's including an extension using profiles: application/ld+json; profile="https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels
Activity
CxRes commentedon Nov 7, 2024
Can you give an example or propose a PR for language change on this?
CxRes commentedon Dec 30, 2024
Having mulled this over, I propose removing references to LDP Resources, for notifications can be sent from any Solid resource. The essence of Solid Notifications is that the notification message is RDF.
However, I do not see how we can generalize notifications beyond Solid in Solid-PREP without changing the definitions of Classes of Products. Further, the implementation guidance for triggers and activity mapping are Solid specific.
CxRes commentedon Dec 30, 2024
See #22 as a first step (Built Artifact)!