-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add a Note about the subject IRI of the Activity #11
Comments
I am assigning this to you. Please propose a PR! |
I think this is the relevant part:
{
"id": "urn:uuid:0798c962-1879-448f-af44-f83162a029be",
"published": "2024-11-07T14:15:58Z",
"type": "Add",
"object": "/dokieli/inbox/fa6ec1e0-dd3f-4b1f-b915-6dc3311351af.ttl",
"target": "https://csarven.localhost/dokieli/inbox/",
"state": "W/\"7-rM9AyJuqT6iOan/xHh+AW+7K/T8\"",
"http://www.w3.org/ns/iana/link-relations/relation#prev": { "id": "urn:uuid:ee641336-dfd4-4004-9ed2-c0ef0d11d844" },
"@context": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
"https://www.w3.org/ns/solid/notification/v1"
]
} |
Will fix! This is different from what I am trying to express with In Solid Notifications also we can use this, to send any pending notifications before continuing. Id can do that job too but server has a two-step process where it will internally determine which event generated the uuid and then send notifications from that. I suppose I should file an issue there. In any case, a resumption mechanic is something SNP can benefit from as well.
|
Noting here as well: on second thought, I would suggest against using bnodes. These events should have an identity, so stick to IRIs. |
I have created PR#17 that fixes the Data Model with neutral language. If you still feel strongly, we can add an advisory that implantations should use IRIs and not blank nodes. |
I think that systems that use bnodes in the end may have a hard time dealing with them in auditing cases or recalling the notifications. My sense is that these activities need to be treated as unique and persistent identifiers. bnodes will pose a problem all around. I don't have implementation experience on this at this point obviously. |
We need to discuss this in the context of SNP! |
In nodeSolidServer/node-solid-server#1799 , I mentioned that the Activity could use an HTTP URI or a bnode (with UUID values in the string).
I think the spec could use a Note for server implementers to consider what they might want to use where/when...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: