- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 17:52:01 +0200
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com>, W3C JSON-LD Working Group <public-json-ld-wg@w3.org>, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>
- Message-Id: <8F851CCE-5346-4B9F-93EA-19D5ECCCCB20@w3.org>
> On 30 Sep 2019, at 17:48, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: > >> On Sep 30, 2019, at 8:37 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote: >> >> Yep. What this means is that if we use @direction in the Publication Manifest, then we do have to add a note that this is a 1.1 feature, and if an application uses a JSON-LD processor _and_ @direction is used, then it is necessary to use 1.1 > > I believe the feeling of the group was that you should normatively reference JSON-LD 1.1, not 1.0. You may note the specific 1.1 features you’re limited to, but the future is longer than the past, and I would expect that the distinction would fade pretty rapidly. Yes, we would definitely refer to 1.1. The only thing I think should be done is to add a note in the document warning that @direction is a genuinly 1.1 feature. That being said… on your advise the publication manifest's context does contain a bunch of @language:null statements (e.g., when the expected string value is a URL). I wonder whether it would be necessary to add a @direction:null to those, in case the author adds a global @direction. Probably yes, but that would create problems with 1.0 processors, too Ivan > > Gregg > >> We can mitigate the effect if we do _not_ add a "direction":"@direction" alias into the publication manifest context. >> >> I realize the Publication manifest is not the JSON-LD WG's problem, but it is an obvious use case for the transition… >> >> Thx >> >> Ivan >> >>> On 30 Sep 2019, at 16:56, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> wrote: >>> >>> We discussed this quite a bit at the F2F. IIRC, the feeling was that if schema.org <http://schema.org/> decide to use this, the impact would be limited, but would require the use of a 1.1 processor. And, not properly ignoring non-keywords that look like keywords could be considered a 1.0 bug, as the syntax spec says they should be ignored. >>> >>> Gregg Kellogg >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Sep 30, 2019, at 6:59 AM, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com <mailto:byoung@bigbluehat.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> That's because of the schema.org <http://schema.org/> context using `@vocab`. If they didn't, then a JSON-LD 1.0 processor wouldn't choke. For example: https://tinyurl.com/y3vzjegw <https://tinyurl.com/y3vzjegw> (maps `name` directly in `@context`). >>>> >>>> Sadly, the most widely used context files (presumably Schema.org <http://schema.org/> and ActivityStreams) use `@vocab`. >>>> >>>> We did discuss this for a long while at TPAC...but I don't think we ever found a solution for old processors + `@vocab` containing context files... >>>> >>>> It's best expressed in this issue: >>>> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/259 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/259> >>>> >>>> Which resulted in reopening this one: >>>> https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/16 <https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/16> >>>> >>>> We can make sure getting us all in sync around this status is on the agenda for this Friday. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Benjamin >>>> -- >>>> http://bigbluehat.com/ <http://bigbluehat.com/> >>>> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung <http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung> >>>> From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> >>>> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 4:29 AM >>>> To: W3C JSON-LD Working Group <public-json-ld-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-json-ld-wg@w3.org>> >>>> Subject: @direction in json ld 1.0 >>>> >>>> Maybe I did not remember right, but we thought that "@direction" should be absorbed by a JSON-LD 1.0 processor, ie, we can deploy it safely. However, the construction: >>>> >>>> >>>> { >>>> "@context":"https://schema.org <https://schema.org/>", >>>> "name" : { >>>> "@value": "na mi van", >>>> "@language": "hu", >>>> "@direction": "ltr" >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> will not work either; there will be an error message due to the presence of value and direction in one object (see [1]). >>>> >>>> I guess we cannot do anything about it, but it is a bit of a pain:-) >>>> >>>> [1] https://tinyurl.com/y6goh76p <https://tinyurl.com/y6goh76p> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> Ivan Herman, W3C >>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/> >>>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>>> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/> >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704> >> > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Monday, 30 September 2019 15:52:07 UTC