W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > January 2014

JSON-LD Telecon Minutes for 2014-01-07

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 17:27:36 +0100
To: "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Cc: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00ef01cf0bc5$60e16200$22a42600$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
Despite not sending out a formal agenda we had a brief telecon today. 
The minutes are now available.

http://json-ld.org/minutes/2014-01-07/

A full transcript of the meeting can be found below.
The audio will be added soon.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON-LD Community Group Telecon Minutes for 2014-01-07

Agenda:
   n/a (ad-hoc telecon)
Topics:
   1. Tooling for JSON-LD
   2. Context at schema.org
   3. Processing of relative IRIs without base
   4. Subtree split to create a repository containing just the 
      JSON-LD tests
Chair:
   Markus Lanthaler
Scribe:
   Markus Lanthaler
Present:
   Niklas Lindström, Markus Lanthaler, Paul Kuykendall, Dave Longley
Audio:
   http://json-ld.org/minutes/2014-01-07/audio.ogg

Niklas Lindström: .. Is there a telecon today? We planned for the 
   7th last time, but there's been no mail about it.
Markus Lanthaler: I don't know myself.. I just joined but was the 
   only one
Paul Kuykendall: I was wondering about that myself
Markus Lanthaler: Do we have something to talk about?
Paul Kuykendall: We discussed last time the "next steps" with 
   respect to tooling, etc.
Paul Kuykendall: Do we have any other items that we should go 
   over?
Niklas Lindström: I guess we ended by saying something like "of 
   course, unless we have a bunch of topics/issues, we could wait 
   until we've gathered some and then issue a call"..
Markus Lanthaler: There was some discussion regarding the context 
   at schema.org but other than that I don't think anything else 
   happened
Markus Lanthaler:  I agree, I think that's about it right now. 
   [scribe assist by Niklas Lindström]
Markus Lanthaler: So I guess we postpone the telecon!?
Paul Kuykendall: Has anyone/group come up with a wish-list of 
   tools, etc. that would be beneficial?
Niklas Lindström: I've no problems with taking that on the list 
   and see if we can coalesce the questions around that (publishing 
   contexts, caching and other tooling)
Markus Lanthaler: pkuyken.. do you want to briefly discuss this 
   on the call? I'm happy to have a brief call but also fine with 
   moving it to the mailing list
Paul Kuykendall: dialing in
Markus Lanthaler: niklkasl, will you join us as well for a couple 
   of minutes?
Niklas Lindström: sure, dialing in
Markus Lanthaler: ping m4nu, taaz, dlongley_
Dave Longley:  we are having a brief call if you want to join 
   [scribe assist by Markus Lanthaler]
Dave Longley: i can join for a bit
Markus Lanthaler is scribing.

Topic: Tooling for JSON-LD

Paul Kuykendall: 2) Schema.org discussion on list
Paul Kuykendall:  during the last telecon we discussed what 
   tooling we wanted to have
   ... I'm wondering where we are at
   ... do we want to put something up on json-ld.org or on the 
   wiki on GitHub?
Niklas Lindström: is having sound issues, so I may miss some 
   speech from time to time
Markus Lanthaler:  me too
Dave Longley:  I think it would be good to have a primer
   ... David Lehn was working on it some time ago but it's not 
   done yet
   ... people have issues understanding some things (like 
   overloading of @type)
   ... not sure if a primer would help
   ... regarding tools: I think creating a wiki page and linking 
   it from json-ld.org would be a good start
Niklas Lindström: +1 for a wish list (and list of common 
   questions)
   ... also updates for the playground would be nice
Paul Kuykendall:  a simple copy button on the playground would be 
   awesome
   ... where shall we track these things?
Dave Longley:  regarding the playground I think you should just 
   file an issue
Paul Kuykendall:  the only concern I have with the wiki (w3c 
   wiki) is that people have the feeling to have to dig into specs
   ... instead of just having to use tools etc.
Dave Longley:  I think we could just use Github issues for this 
   as well
Niklas Lindström:  one difficult question is always if JSON-LD is 
   usable as just JSON
   ... schema.org might be an example for that.. can people use 
   different terms (if they are properly mapped in the context)?
Dave Longley:  I think we should focus on the JSON side of things
Niklas Lindström:  yeah.. we should mention what kind of 
   constraints that imposes in the primer
Dave Longley:  do people agree with paul that we should avoid the 
   wiki
Niklas Lindström:  yeah, wikis are lousy for discussion
Markus Lanthaler:  I agree. I would prefer to just use Gihub 
   issues with a specific tag so that we can directly link to that 
   list
Dave Longley: http://json-ld.org/primer/latest/
(etherpad could be better but issue is good and available)
Markus Lanthaler:  I think we shouldn't format it using ReSpec 
   but make it look more like a blog post
Dave Longley:  yeah

Topic: Context at schema.org

Paul Kuykendall:  do we want to discuss the context at schema.org 
   now?
Markus Lanthaler:  I don't think we can discuss much here because 
   (unfortunately) we are not in control there
Niklas Lindström:  one of the interesting questions to me is that 
   at this stage the intent of the examples being published is to 
   create data being published by Google
   ... I think this intended for publishers to publish data for 
   Google and the other schema.org search engines.. not other people
   ... Google obviously will have their own caches
Markus Lanthaler:  most problems could be addressed by using 
   @vocab
Dave Longley:  that wouldn't address the problem that Martin Hepp 
   is throwing in (tools accessing various schema.org URLs for 
   properties etc.)
Niklas Lindström:  that might be a problem because tools might do 
   optimizations like prefetching etc.
   ... there are no such tools available for JSON-LD (yet)
Markus Lanthaler:  that's a general Linked Data "problem"
   ... tools like Tabulator etc. will have to dereference 
   properties etc. to get their labels
Dave Longley:  in a lot of cases that's the whole point of all 
   this
   ... anyway. I think there's progress been made on the mailing 
   list

Topic: Processing of relative IRIs without base

Dave Longley:  markus, I think we never decided what happens when 
   base is set to null
Markus Lanthaler:  https://github.com/lanthaler/JsonLD/issues/47
Markus Lanthaler:  at least my understanding from reading the 
   RFCs is that the algorithms can only be run if there's a base
   ... if @base is set to null then there's none
Dave Longley:  is there not even something like path 
   normalization we might could run
Markus Lanthaler:  I don't think so.. the algorithms are not 
   defined
   ... http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5
   ... The term "relative" implies that a "base URI" exists 
   against which the relative reference is applied. Aside from 
   fragment-only references (Section 4.4), relative references are 
   only usable when a base URI is known.
   ... A base URI must be established by the parser prior to 
   parsing URI references that might be relative.
Dave Longley:  I'm fine with not touching relativ IRIs if there's 
   no base
Markus Lanthaler:  it's a bit weird but should we add a test for 
   this?
Dave Longley:  hmm.. no I don't think so
Markus Lanthaler:  it's weird but we don't need to use an empty 
   string
Dave Longley:  yeah.. maybe that makes sense
Markus Lanthaler:  that brings me to something else...

Topic: Subtree split to create a repository containing just the JSON-LD
tests

Markus Lanthaler:   could we create a subtree split including 
   just the tests?
Paul Kuykendall:  I think that would be a great idea
Markus Lanthaler:  do you have access to set up a post-commit 
   webhook on GitHub? I don't
Dave Longley:  I have access
   ... I'll try to give you access as well



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2014 16:28:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:18 UTC