HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
solid
solid-spec
Learning & Reference2015–2022
solid / solid-spec · Archived

solid-spec

Solid specification draft 0.7.0

11Distinct people
13Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.1KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Solid specification draft 0.7.0

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 11:56:56 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year13 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-11-08 12:30:14 UTC to 2022-04-01 18:55:04 UTC.

02462015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC606
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

13 sources
NYTimes/DBSlayer (2007) wraps MySQL in JSON: https://open.nytimes.com/introducing-dbslayer-64d7168a143f ODBC > Bridging configurations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Database_Connectivity#Bri... awesome-graphql > tools: security: https://github.com/chentsulin/awesome-graphql#tools---securi... ... W3C SOLID > Authorization and Access Control: https://github.com/solid/solid-spec#authorization-and-access... "Hosting SQLite Databases on GitHub Pages" (2021) re: sql.js-httpvfs, DuckDB https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28021766 [edit] TIL the MS ODBC 4.0 spec is MIT Licensed, on GitHub , and supports ~challenge/response token auth: "3.2.2 Web-based Authentication Flow with SQLBrowseConnect" https://github.com/microsoft/ODBC-Specification/blob/master/... > Applications that are unable to allow drivers to pop up dialogs can call SQLBr
Read the rest
owseConnect to connect to the service. > SQLBrowseConnect provides an iterative dialog between the driver and the application where the application passes in an initial input connection string. If the connection string contains sufficient information to connect, the driver responds with SQL_SUCCESS and an output connection string containing the complete set of connection attributes used. > If the initial input connection string does not contain sufficient information to connect to the source, the driver responds with SQL_NEED_DATA and an output connection string specifying informational attributes for the application (such as the authorization url) as well as required attributes to be specified in a subsequent call to SQLBrowseConnect. Attribute names returned by SQLBrowseConnect may include a colon followed by a localized identifier, and the value of the requested attribute is either a single question mark or a comma-separated list of valid values (optionally including localized identifiers) enclosed in curly braces. Optional attributes are returned preceded with an asterix (*). > In a Web-based authentication scenario, if SQLBrowseConnect is called with an input connection string containing an access token that has not expired, along with any other required properties, no additional information should be required. If the access token has expired and the connection string contains a refresh token, the driver attempts to refresh the connection using the supplied refresh token. Also TIL ODBC 4.0 supports: https://github.com/microsoft/ODBC-Specification : > Semi-structured data – Tables whose schema may not be defined or may change on a row-by-row basis > Hierarchical Data – Data with nested structure (structured fields, lists) > Web Authentication model
In Postgres wire compatible SQLite proxy
What are the optimizations in JMAP that make it faster than, say, Solid? Solid is built on a bunch of W3C Web, Security, and Linked Data Standards; LDP: Linked Data Protocol, JSON-LD: JSON Linked Data, WebID-TLS, REST, WebSockets, LDN: Linked Data Notifications. [1][2] Different worlds, I suppose. There's no reason you couldn't represent RFC5322 data with RDF as JSONLD. There's now a way to do streaming JSON-LD. LDP does paging and querying. Solid supports pubsub with WebSockets and LDN. It may or may not (yet?) be as efficient for synchronization as JMAP, but it's definitely designed for all types of objects with linked data web standards; and client APIs can just parse JSON-LD. [1] https://github.com/solid/information#solid-specifications [2] https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/issues/123 "WebSockets and HTTP/2" SSE (Server-Side Events)
Read the rest
https://jmap.io/ JMAP: JSON Meta Application Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON_Meta_Application_Protocol Is there a OpenAPI Specification for JMAP? There are a bunch of tools for Swagger / OpenAPIs: DRY interactive API docs, server implementations, code generators: https://swagger.io/tools/open-source/ https://openapi.tools/ Does JMAP support labels; such that I don't need to download a message and an attachment and mark it as read twice like labels over IMAP? How does this integrate with webauthn; is that a different layer? (edit) Other email things: openpgpjs; Web Key Directory /.well-known/openpgpkey/*; if there's no webserver on the MX domain, you can use the ACME DNS challenge to get free 3-month certs from LetsEncrypt. https://wiki.gnupg.org/WKD
In JMAP: A modern, open email protocol
Spec: https://github.com/solid/solid-spec Source: https://github.com/solid/solid ... From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16615679 ( https://westurner.github.io/hnlog/#comment-16615679 ) > ActivityPub (and OStatus, and ActivityStreams/Salmon, and OpenSocial) are all great specs and great ideas. Hosting and moderation cost real money (which spammers/scammers are wasting). > Know what's also great? Learning. For learning, we have the xAPI/TinCan spec and also schema.org/Action. Mastodon has now supplanted GNU StatusNet.
In Tim Berners-Lee’s Solid is a platform designed to re-decentralize the web
I don't see how the spelling errors in the spec can possibly discredit the technical merits of it. There are some parts of the project that I don't like or maybe simply don't understand. For example, its user stories include an utterly simplistic privacy system [1]. [1] https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/blob/master/UserStories/... What if Ian starts spamming everyone on the entire web (let's call this 'root node') with his "you've got a file from Ian" notices? Some kind of rate limiting system is required in this case, but is it really possible to decentralize such a system? I imagine a system of many communities that can be subscribed to, think of subreddits, with their own behavioral rules (code of conduct?) requirements, groups, permissions, blacklists etc. So if Ian and Jane both are subscribed to the same community that grants the
Read the rest
m the permission to do the described actions (thus Ian is not banned nor is over his rate limit to send his notice to Jane, and Jane's privacy settings permit people like Ian to send their notices to her), they can be performed. I'd call that a 'third party node'. Such a system would also solve the problem of discoverability. I expect the rise of the githubs and gitlabs of Solid if this problem is not accounted for early on. Let's say these two users already got to know each other and they want to decouple from the restrictions of the third party node they were met at, how can they pair their 'profile nodes' so that there's no more third party constrains to limit their interactions? Let's say the profile nodes include a social, facebook-y, functionality in them. Ian sends a direct pairing request to Jane. She accepts, by including him to a personal custom group named 'new friends' that will restrict him to be able to see only a few of her photos (maybe based on the tags that were used on the photos, maybe based on creation timestamp ranges so he is able to see only her most recent/ probably less embarrassing ones, who knows, she's the one to decide). On her personal node, it's her rules. Much better control than the current social media sites provide. This calls for a really privilege-centered system. Can Solid provide it?
In Solid aims to radically change the way web applications work
Wishing that the landing page had a clearer explanation of how Solid provides a means for the owner of the data to control who can access their data, people and applications, as well as what the process of moving ones data from a given store to another. This project looks like it has huge potential, I just want to be able to understand at a glance what privacy controls are in place without reading the source code before committing my personal information. EDIT: Found the specifications documentation linked to from some of the example apps[0][1]. It would be great to have more of this information on the landing page for the project. [0] https://github.com/solid/solid-spec [1] https://github.com/solid/solid/blob/master/README.md
In Solid aims to radically change the way web applications work
I think a lot of this stuff will rely on a more formal spec like https://github.com/solid/solid-spec to be useful. For identity, there's https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/blob/master/solid-webid-... Right now I'm particularly interested in https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec although I think it's incomplete when it comes to data portability and access control. From what I've seen on re-decentralizing the internet, access control is either non-existent, or relies on a server hosting your data to implement access control correctly. What if, in the WAC protocol linked above, instead of ACL resources informing the server, we could have ACL resources providing clients with keys to the encrypted resource (presumably wrapped in each authorized agent's pub key). Host proof data is a necessity for decentralized social networking
Read the rest
IMO, even if the majority of agents would happily hand their keys over to their host.
In An off-grid social network

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.