- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 17:13:15 -1000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
- Cc: Dietrich Schulten <ds@escalon.de>, Hydra <public-hydra@w3.org>
hello.
On 2015-09-28 21:23, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> We're post-LC and the WG has very little energy for more changes. I'd suggest that if someone wanted to do this, they could easily do so in a separate document.
following up on this: this looks as if option 2 (separate spec but
something that can be reused and is not just useful for hydra) may be
something to consider.
generally speaking, i think that these reusable components of service
semantics might be useful for reuse. if anybody feels the same about RDF
and JSON-LD, i'd be more than happy to help with seeing how well and
easily the HTTP problem model could be adapted to be used with the RDF
metamodel.
that exercise might also be useful for other such components under
development, such as the home document spec
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-json-home), which also has
a proposed XML serialization
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-home-xml).
cheers,
dret.
--
erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 |
| UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) |
| http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2015 03:13:51 UTC