W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > January 2013

RE: Intent to close ISSUE-204

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:41:17 +0100
To: "'Manu Sporny'" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: <public-linked-json@w3.org>, "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <021701cdf33f$27cf5200$776df600$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
As decided in today's telecon I've marked the default behavior as at risk
([1], [2]) and closed ISSUE-204 [3].

Cheers,
Markus


[1] http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-api/#widl-JsonLdOptions-base
[2]
https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/commit/ee0fa3eda3616b031a1c13cac345b1
8f532b696b
[3] https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/204


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manu Sporny [mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 6:40 PM
> To: Markus Lanthaler
> Cc: public-linked-json@w3.org; 'RDF WG'
> Subject: Re: Intent to close ISSUE-204
> 
> On 01/14/2013 11:42 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > On Monday, January 14, 2013 5:34 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
> >
> >> Don't close it yet. We found an issue when implementing this that
> >> affects any system storing JSON-LD in compact form. I'd like to
> >> discuss a best practice when dealing with this issue...
> >> document-relative URLs are a problem for the Web Payments work.
> >
> > OK. Could you elaborate a bit? Passing null (or '') as the base IRI
> > in JsonLdOptions doesn't address the problem?
> 
> The problem in a nutshell is that we store JSON-LD data in compact form
> (to save space in the database). Thus, if the library was used in its
> default configuration, and a base URL was passed to the library, then
> all @id paths would become relative before storing the document.
> 
> If a developer fails to store the base URL, or set the base URL to
> null,
> then they lose the URL forever. My concern is that others may start
> doing this as well and not know about the nuance. I'm concerned about
> this being the default behavior.
> 
> There is an argument that surely people will catch this before a system
> goes into production, but I think it's the aggressive optimization that
> I find concerning. I'd rather there is a flag that says "optimize @id
> URLs", than just do it by default... because when you do it, you lose
> information and the only way to get that information back is to make
> sure your application remembers the lost information.
> 
> -- manu
> 
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: HTML5 and RDFa 1.1
> http://manu.sporny.org/2012/html5-and-rdfa/
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2013 16:41:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:53 GMT