Re: Removing Activity Types not used by User Stories

hello elf.

On 2015-03-25 10:21, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> IMO we really better focus in WG on other issues, one very relevant here
> ISSUE-16: better separate grammar/vocabulary and improved spec structure
> https://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/16

of course i have to pitch in here because that was my proposal a little 
while ago. i think it's clear that AS2 needs to be open and needs a 
solid model for extensibility. what AS1 called the "base schema" simply 
should be the first and w3c-blessed extension that implementations 
should support.

in my mind, AS1 had a better structure because the spec itself had a 
very basic set (mostly the basic AS grammar) of verbs and object types 
and properties, and then the base schema extended this in a separate spec.

if we want to be extensible i think we should eat our own dogfood and do 
what AS1 did: separate AS grammar and vocabulary, and treat the "base 
vocabulary" as an extension. not only would we validate our own 
extensibility model, we would also create a blueprint for those who want 
to create their own extensions.

btw, for those interested in declarative extensibility: i just finished 
the ASDL experiment of converting the AS1 base schema into a structured 
list, and our general approach is to treat this no different than any 
other possible extension of the AS1 core. here's ASDL's current 
playground, but please keep in mind that this is all about AS1:

https://github.com/dret/ASDL/tree/master/0.1

cheers,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |

Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2015 09:42:59 UTC