- From: elf Pavlik <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 21:37:45 +0200
- To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- CC: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Hydra <public-hydra@w3.org>, public-ldpnext@w3.org, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
On 10/12/2015 06:28 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote: > Hi Elf, Melvin, > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:54 AM, elf Pavlik <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> > wrote: > >> On 10/11/2015 11:18 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>> On 11 October 2015 at 14:13, elf Pavlik <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> >>> wrote: >>>> In Social Web WG I see need that we draw a clear distinction between >>>> vocabulary terms needed for describing particular data and vocabulary >>>> terms for describing API(s) for accessing this particular data over >>>> HTTP. >>> AS2.0 as a vocab seems to be a pretty decent piece of work, tho. The >>> Social Interest Group (IG) has a vocabulary task force. So I wonder if >>> this might become more prominent. Comparing the different vocabs seems >>> valuable, and perhaps it would be possible to snapshot microformats and >> put >>> it in the w3c namespace as another vocab. >> I would prefer to avoid discussing here any vocabularies related to >> describing logical relationships between data entities and stay focused >> on terms relevant to APIs. >> > > One area of clear overlap, also with the Annotation WG, is Collections and > Pages. The Annotation WG has agreed for the next WD of its protocol > deliverable to use AS 2.0 OrderedCollection and the equivalent paging > construction, in place of LDP Paging that is currently specified. > > This is also present at least in the Triple Pattern Fragment and it would > be good to align with either LDP or AS2.0 rather than trying to promote yet > another paging specification, without the force of a working group behind > it. I added AS2.0 links to https://github.com/w3c-social/Social-APIs-Brainstorming/wiki/LDP,-Hydra,-LDF Actually I consider proposing removing them from AS2.0 drafts since they address concerns of an API and not really relate to the data modeling itself. From your perspective, does it fit AS2.0 spec or you would rather see it defined in an API specific spec?
Received on Monday, 12 October 2015 19:37:49 UTC