I find it concerning that the “delay in finalizing the Solid specification” is being attributed to “pushback from a particular corner of the Solid community.” This kind of vague accusation is unproductive, as it doesn’t foster transparency or collaboration
As a community, it’s important to raise and resolve issues openly rather than let them fester. If there are genuine concerns, let’s discuss them in the appropriate forums and work together to move things forward. Reminder that we have a Solid Code of Conduct that helps us guide our interactions.
Hadrian, who is representing Inrupt, has been co-chairing the CG for about a year. Despite this, I don’t recall any meaningful discussions or code, and I can’t find anything on public record about wallets, aside from the contributions of Henry Story. In fact, this is, to my knowledge, the first time Inrupt’s wallet is mentioned in a Solid community space.
I find it concerning that these efforts are being put forward as if they are representing the CG or the community about a particular solution (or at least not clearly separated), especially coming from one of the co-chairs of the CG. This might be indicative that there could be a conflict of interest.
Public communication of this topic could use improvement, considering the clear guidelines at solid/CONTRIBUTING.md at main · w3c-cg/solid · GitHub - this is so that it is crystal clear that this solution has been developed exclusively and independently at Inrupt, without any input from the CG, and certainly not representative in any way of the Solid CG or Solid community as a whole.