This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason
Spam
Abuse
Off Topic
Outdated
Duplicate
Resolved
Low Quality
Good catch — my issue-body example was inconsistent with the code. I've updated #320's Before/After to use @id/@type (matching what this PR actually emits) and added a short rationale:
Nested service entries use the JSON-LD keywords @id and @type directly. CID 1.0's own context URL (https://www.w3.org/ns/cid/v1) provides id/type aliases for authors who prefer the shorter form, but since this profile uses inline term definitions rather than a context URL, we stick with the keywords — they're JSON-LD-native and don't depend on an out-of-band context fetch. A verifier that runs a JSON-LD processor (the expected behaviour for CID-conformant tooling) expands both forms identically.
On the naive-plain-JSON-lookup concern specifically: a verifier that reads this doc as plain JSON would also see "@type": "lws:OpenIdProvider" — which is a CURIE that only expands to https://www.w3.org/ns/lws#OpenIdProvider via the context. So any verifier that doesn't run JSON-LD expansion is already broken regardless of id vs @id. Running a JSON-LD processor is the minimum bar for reading CID-conformant documents, and once that's in play both key shapes are equivalent.
Could you re-review now that the PR description / issue examples match the code?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
`Turtle should include the cid:serviceEndpoint predicate, got:\n${ttl}`
);
// The service entry URI appears as a subject (its own line), proving it
// was emitted as a first-class node rather than a bare URI reference.
assert.ok(
/#oidc>\s+(?:a|<[^>]*#type>)/.test(ttl),
`Turtle should emit the service entry as a subject, got:\n${ttl}`
);
});
});
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Emit CID service[] with lws:OpenIdProvider in WebID profiles (#320) #321
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Emit CID service[] with lws:OpenIdProvider in WebID profiles (#320) #321
Filter by extension
Viewed files
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityGood catch — my issue-body example was inconsistent with the code. I've updated #320's Before/After to use @id/@type (matching what this PR actually emits) and added a short rationale:
On the naive-plain-JSON-lookup concern specifically: a verifier that reads this doc as plain JSON would also see "@type": "lws:OpenIdProvider" — which is a CURIE that only expands to https://www.w3.org/ns/lws#OpenIdProvider via the context. So any verifier that doesn't run JSON-LD expansion is already broken regardless of id vs @id. Running a JSON-LD processor is the minimum bar for reading CID-conformant documents, and once that's in play both key shapes are equivalent.
Could you re-review now that the PR description / issue examples match the code?
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.