- From: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 12:08:54 +0200
- To: public-json-ld-wg@w3.org
Dear all, since I was not able to participate to yesterday's meeting, I'm happy to provide some late feedback. > Gregg Kellogg: Converting YAML to internal representation: We shouldn't have to work on, but have to. I still need to analyze the work done by the wg, so I'll provide feedback soon. In general I propose to defer to separate documents everything that is too complex to be completed at the moment IETF manages to land application/yaml and +yaml In this way we can "block" the ld+yaml media type. Currently there's no ETA for application/yaml though. > Benjamin Young: `@Context` signals that you're looking at JSON-LD in the same way > that `$schema` does for JSON Schema. I'd be opposed to allowing it to be aliased +1 > Benjamin Young: We could e.g. enable YAML-LD in the existing JSON-LD playground +1 This is exactly what people are expecting. What do we need to support this? I think that a separate website will be useful if and when we extend the JSON-LD data model / internal representation with YAML constructs. In the meantime YAML support in the playground will help us in our work. > Benjamin Young: Json-ld.org has a good reputation. > But still the community is limited, so concentrating efforts would be good idea +1 In general, creating new websites / new domains tends to disperse the audience too. Thanks for keeping up the good job! Have a nice day, R.
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2022 08:12:12 UTC