Re: Introducing CBOR-LD...

(This is just an admin response to this mail.)


The JSON-LD WG will transition, in the coming weeks, into a maintenance WG (one reason why this has not happened yet is due to my vacations…). This means setting up a similar structure as for VC: the technical work and further development will happen at the JSON for LD Community group[1]. The WG will only take care of 'maintenance', which may include publishing WG Notes like a CBOR-LD, but the technical discussions should happen in the CG.

All this to say that this work and discussion should also be happening on that CG, too; possibly the best is to simply take care of both mailing lists being on the cc list for this thread. But I leave this to you…



[1] <>

> On 24 Jul 2020, at 23:46, Manu Sporny <> wrote:
> On 7/24/20 4:33 PM, Nader Helmy wrote:
>> Is the former spec simply an evolution of the latter? What’s the delta
>> between these approaches?
> In the final days of the JSON-LD 1.1 WG an attempt was made to put a
> NOTE together for a "CBOR encoding for JSON-LD", which is slightly
> different from what CBOR-LD is attempting to do (compression is a big
> focus of CBOR-LD, not just encoding JSON-LD into CBOR).
> The group had been (rightly) prioritizing getting JSON-LD 1.1 and
> associated algorithms shipped. The JSON-LD 1.1 WG, with a huge thanks to
> Gregg Kellogg, did yeoman's work getting us to an updated version of
> JSON-LD 1.1. The official JSON-LD 1.1 Recommendation was finalized just
> a week ago:
> So, the difference is that the document worked on by the WG was a way to
> encode JSON-LD in CBOR, whereas the thing that was just announced on
> this mailing list was a way of compressing JSON-LD into a new format
> called CBOR-LD that would enable a reduction in file size AND possibly
> an increase in compute speed (neither of those were goals of the format
> considered by the JSON-LD WG, IIRC).
> I hope that CBOR-LD (the most recent announcement) will be what we focus
> on as the months roll on... but I say that not having discussed any of
> this with the JSON-LD WG... we'll have to see what Ivan, Gregg, and our
> friends over there think about this new approach. Additionally, we need
> to chat with Pierre-Antoine, who I believe did a lot of the work on
> JSON-LD-CBOR to see if he feels there are key design criteria that we
> missed when we put CBOR-LD together.
> -- manu
> -- 
> Manu Sporny -
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches

Ivan Herman, W3C 
mobile: +33 6 52 46 00 43

Received on Saturday, 25 July 2020 05:51:31 UTC