Re: Social data /syntax/ vs Social data /vocabulary/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2014 07:24 PM, Erik Wilde wrote:
> what about:
> 
> On 2014-09-21, 9:00, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>>>> Now, there is an open question of should we be defining a
>>>> /syntax/ or a /vocabulary*/?
> 
> we need both.
> 
> - a vocabulary is the set of concepts that are meaningful for the 
> relevant domain. you can define a vocabulary in some existing
> metamodel framework, or do it ad hoc. both choices have good and
> bad side-effects.
> 
> - a syntax is a representation that has well-defined rules how to 
> serialize a vocabulary instance into the representation, and how
> to parse a representation into the domain model. without a syntax,
> you cannot have protocols or other ways of exchanging data.
> 
>> Could we try clarify this distinction between /syntax/ and
>> /vocabulary/ before tuesday call?
> 
> is the above distinction clear enough? for AS1, it was pretty
> clear:
> 
> - the vocabulary was in an ad hoc metamodel, and thus there was
> little baggage (but also little out-of-the-box support) associated
> with it.
> 
> - the syntaxes were JSON and Atom, and for both syntaxes it was
> defined how the vocabulary model maps to the syntax model.

Correct.

We are focussed on the syntax. This is going to be JSON (possibly
JSON-LD), plus whatever minimal metadata is needed to support activity
streams (i.e. status updates and actions in a generic sense).

Note that *generic vocabulary* discussion is out-of-scope for the
Social WG  supposed to happen in the Social Interest Group. For
example, vocabularies for "friends" and the like which are covered by
numerous vocabularies (schema.org, XFN, vCard, PortableContacts, FOAF,
etc.) can be sorted out there. Same with many other vocabularies, like
expert-finding. There's a lot of Social Vocabularies and we should
keep this WG focussed.

http://www.w3.org/Social/IG/

I can see how one can call ActivityStreams 2.0 metadata and schema.org
actions "vocabularies", and that's fine - but should constrain the
vocabulary discussion to the minimal vocabulary necessary for status
updates and actions.

> 
> cheers,
> 
> dret.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=Qa5U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Sunday, 21 September 2014 22:40:54 UTC