Re: Social WG Deliverable "Social Data Syntax" / vocabulary

On 05/26/2014 08:06 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> This item in the charter refers generally to Activity Streams 2.0 and a social 
> data ontology that will be required to layer on top. JSON and JSON-LD are 
> implicit requirements but do not, on their own, provide everything that is needed.

Also, note that we want whatever syntax we use (a profile on top of
JSON/JSON-LD) would allow folks to use different vocabularies, as there
are many heterogeneous social systems that need to interoperate.
ActivityStreams 2.0 cuts the connection with the ActivityStreams 1.0
schema, allowing it be generalized.

As long as it's identified with a URI we should be able to use it.

As regards "realistic timeline", ActivityStreams 2.0 already exists as a
draft, so I think we can move quick to at least a FPWD. Federation
itself will be tricky.

  cheers,
        harry



> 
> - James M Snell
> jasnell@us.ibm.com
> Sent from IBM Notes Traveler
> 
> 
> 
> Andreas Kuckartz --- Social WG Deliverable "Social Data Syntax" / vocabulary ---
> 
> From: "Andreas Kuckartz" <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
> To public-fedsocweb@w3.org, internal-socbizcg@w3.org
> Date: Mon, May 26, 2014 2:48 AM
> Subject Social WG Deliverable "Social Data Syntax" / vocabulary
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The [DRAFT] Social Web Working Group Charter mentions this deliverable:
> 
> "Social Data Syntax
> A JSON-based syntax to allow the transfer of social information, such as
> status updates, across differing social systems. One input to this
> deliverable is ActivityStreams 2.0."
> http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html
> 
> I am a bit confused about the use of the term syntax here. I think that
> a rather simple restriction of JSON to the JSON-LD subset which can be
> treated as an RDF-serialization should be made in the deliverable. But I
> do not see the need for a lengthy "syntax"-document for that purpose. A
> few paragraphs probably would be enough.
> 
> The real intended core of the deliverable seems to be a *vocabulary* to
> formulate social information. And that is at least as much about
> semantics than syntax.
> 
> According to the draft charter the FPWD is currently planned for Q3
> 2014. That does not seem to be a realistic date for such a deliverable.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>

Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:09:33 UTC