Re: Introducing TreeLDR

TreeLDR is very cool.

This is the project we currently use in a few places which is similar:

https://github.com/transmute-industries/verifiable-data/tree/main/packages/jsonld-schema

It's a collection of tools for working with JSON-LD and JSON Schema.

The primary relevant ones are the ability to:

1. convert a folder of JSON Schemas (with annotation) to a context.
2. convert a JSON LD Document to a JSON Schema.

Another project we looked at briefly is https://linkml.io/

Regards,

OS

On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 10:01 AM bengoering@gmail.com <bengoering@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It would be useful to me to hear a comparison and contrast against other
> extant langs that (maybe) could be used for this, eg
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShEx
>
> Always wondering which use case any given prior art could not fulfill.
> There probably are some, and IMO it’s a gift to posterity to document that.
> It’s also good marketing about the unique value proposition, if any, about
> the new thing.
>
> Thanks for making this and sharing it Wayne.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 27, 2022, at 7:12 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 1:13 PM Wayne Chang <wayne@spruceid.com> wrote:
>
> At this stage, we're pre-official release and are looking for feedback to
> see if it would save anyone else effort
>
>
> Hey Wayne and Timothée, TreeLDR is *really cool*... more below.
>
> Hi all, we wrote about our tool called TreeLDR
>
>
> Alright, first up, your organization's ability to have catchy names
> for software projects continues to impress. TLDR (Too Long, Didn't
> Read) sums up what we've found most developer's feelings toward the
> JSON-LD/JSON Schema/Verifiable Credentials/DIDs stack... "I just can't
> be bothered to read all of this... the customer wants it NOW! Just
> give me some good tooling so I don't need to learn the equivalent of
> x86 Assembly for Verifiable Credentials"!
>
> makes it easier for developers to work with JSON Schema, JSON-LD, and a
> variety of other data schema-related languages you need to consider when
> working with digital credentialing systems.
>
>
> A couple of random thoughts after reading through the blog post:
>
> * I wonder if we can use TreeLDR to generate the base JSON Schema for
> VCs and VPs in the VCWG. It feels like that would be proof that
> TreeLDR could represent just about any other type of VC one could
> dream up. I know Orie has done work in this space as well; I don't know
> how much overlap there is there?
>
> * A TreeLDR playground might be useful, just as a syntax checker/live
> editor, etc.
>
> * We've experienced that some people have a religious hatred for
> namespaces, and others don't... the first population tends to be VERY
> noisy when they complain, and tend to derail important conversations
> around the real benefits of such an approach. More on this below:
>
> During the development of JSON-LD (~2008 timeframe), we introduced the
> concept of CURIEs (Compact URI Expressions)... which was something
> that existed in XML and XHTML2, which enable you to define a namespace
> and alias it, and then use it in other expressions. For example:
> vc:credentialSubject
>
> Using namespaces exposes you to a group of developers from the late
> 90s and early 2000s that continue to carry trauma from that time
> related to "how difficult namespaces were to manage". That vocal
> minority will fight you every step of the way and tends to derail many
> conversations. This is why many of the JSON-LD examples these days,
> and newer contexts don't use CURIEs at all:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/blob/main/contexts/credentials/v2
>
> Now, I personally don't have any issue with the use of CURIEs or
> namespaces... all modern programming languages utilize namespaces to
> manage subsystem complexity. That said, these "XML namespace haters"
> can create great friction when it comes time for moving these sorts of
> things through large enterprises, with Enterprise architects from the
> late 90s, that have decided that XML namespaces (and colons) are the
> devil.
>
> All that to say, try to consider ways of eliminating or hiding the use
> of namespaces. For example, instead of "vc:credentialSubject",
> consider "vc.credentialSubject". Yes, absolutely ridiculous, changing
> ":" to "." -- they're the same thing... but for some reason, people
> don't respond as negatively to namespace dot-notation as they do to
> namespace colon-notation. Apes are funny that way.
>
> Just some off-the-cuff remarks, hope they're helpful.
>
> Finally, thank you for investing Spruce's resources on new
> technologies and community tooling. It creates a rising tide that
> lifts us all.
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>
>

-- 
*ORIE STEELE*
Chief Technical Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://www.transmute.industries>