- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:32:27 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
>ideally, we should have defined everything in terms of pure JSON, so that people only dealing with JSON could read the spec and never even read about the RDF view. and then a separate spec could tell those interested in an RDF view of everything how to do this robustly on top of the JSON. This would argue in favor of splitting Model and Serialization into two separate documents. Serialization could then focus exclusively on the JSON format, with reference to the model. However it does not affect protocol, as we inherit the MUST from LDP of support for the turtle syntax, and thus RDF. >the extra load on Annotation Servers is minimal, but purely JSON clients would not have to actively disregard the @context property from the returned data I don't follow the logic here. By adding a real implementation requirement to the server, we prevent the client from having to ignore something that it's clearly going to ignore anyway, and indeed required to ignore by the relevant specifications? :-1: -- GitHub Notif of comment by azaroth42 See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/52#issuecomment-120534638
Received on Friday, 10 July 2015 21:32:28 UTC