extensions and prefixes(former: internationalization issues)

Hi Ben,

Apologies if I came through in last email as lacking patience :(

On 10/24/2015 02:20 PM, Ben wrote:
> Elf,
> I think we're saying the same thing here.
> 
> Having a field like bitcoin is exactly the same as an implementor not
> defining a context for their extension or including it in the name.  I don't
> know where you got the idea I am against extensions and I still don't
> understand why vendor prefixing concerns you so much then.
> Its equivalent to foaf:age with not having a context.  Its just a
> change of ':' to '-',
> which i'm curious if implementors have had trouble with ':' int the
> same way as '@'.

I see big difference between foaf:age and p3k-food

foaf:age makes a valid CURIE which together with prefix declaration one
can expand to full *unambiguous* (globally unique) URI
http://www.w3.org/TR/curie/

In recent PR James further clarifies their usage
https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/220

p3k-food has very vague 'uniques', even worst case where people start
crating 'extensions' using very common words as prefix e.g. org-*

this foo-* mechanism has no way of preventing accidental naming collisions!

I would like to point out this recent issue in web components repo,
requesting
"Support renaming, aliasing, or namespacing imported elements"
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/344

IMO JSON-LD context provides relatively simple utility to address such
issue with naming collisions!

Cheers!

Received on Saturday, 24 October 2015 13:48:57 UTC