(plus) (facilitator)
(star) (notetaker)


  1. Open PRs  ...ready to go?
    1. https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/pull/154
    2. https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/pull/155
    3. https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/pull/156
    4. https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/pull/158
  2. Establishing a plan for landing this effort by Nov 2017
    1. How do we want to systematically approach spec revision?
    2. Test compatibility suite
    3. Aligning Fedora4 with the specification
    4. At least one other implementation of the specification
      1. Cavendish discussion
  3. Option for implementation of test suite - contractors
    1. Contractors have been contacted and are interested... even if Python
    2. Define initial scope of work
  4. Follow-up on: https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/issues/111
    1. Deletion-related issues
  5. Branding as Core Specification https://github.com/fcrepo/fcrepo-specification/issues/122
  6. Respec license


Plan for landing the spec

  1. Target AuthZ first
  2. Deadline for "completing" webac section:
  3. "Sprint" on AuthZ until Jul 26th


  1. Better error output from tests: What was request, what was response, and what requirement was tested
  2. Provide LDP spec to contractors
  3. Provide Fedora API documentation to contractors
  4. Initial test: Resource Management - GET, HEAD, POST
  5. Initial tests should be limited to things that Fedora impl already does
  6. Action: Simeon to create github issue for language of compatibility tests


  1. #136, do we need to specify
    1. Recursive delete is not required
    2. Require use of headers to indicate capability
  2. Action: Danny to raise delete topics on Slack tomorrow


Action Items