- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:52:41 +0000
- To: public-hydra-logs@w3.org
> is it an option to let Heracles be the reference client? I don't see why not, in principle. But I hope you didn't get my comment the wrong way. I simply meant that I feel that the kind of client @RubenVerborgh was describing is more natural to me. It is more of an experiment in that I flesh it out as I go. I first added some stuff, then tried to use it, and then refactored. The effect may not be 100% how I'd like it and some code is not pretty ;) > But why does this reference implementation have to be pseudo code? I kind of think it's a good idea up to some point. For now I'm actually in favor of a language-agnostic draft of how we agree such a Hydra client would be implemented and APIs consumed. This way we can at least avoid some intricacies of processing JSON-LD. At least for now. It could also help us decide on some pieces of Hydra by investigating whet client can do rather than how we imagine the vocabulary. I may have some insight after starting with Heracles and so would other people that already started some client implementation. Some names include @antoniogarrote, @bergos, @dunglas, @pchampin, @Mec-iS. Can we get you guys on board? > How about we have a conf call to sync on this? Yes, please -- GitHub Notification of comment by tpluscode Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/pull/111#issuecomment-289549360 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 27 March 2017 18:52:47 UTC