- From: Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 14:40:31 +0100
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>, public-json-ld-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAPugn7VTfh_LktX0-QMuOODakD8EBZtAmF+7funaTfnh6SDXxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Le jeu. 14 mars 2024 à 13:10, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> a écrit : > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:06 AM Thomas Francart > <thomas.francart@sparna.fr> wrote: > > Basically, the social aspect of exchanging and documenting context is > simply not addressed, and this is frustrating. JSON-LD contexts are not > only for machines. Sometimes technical people look at them to use and > understand them, we need to carry some documentation information for this. > > How can this be addressed ? > > We had discussed a "@comment" keyword in the past, though there were > good reasons a number of people argued against it (it's non-standard, > bloats the markup during runtime, etc.). Some argued that the best > thing to do might be to just use the syntaxes commenting mechanism, > such as YAML-LD using "#". Others noted that using "rdfs:comment" > would be better. Still others noted that the place for commentary is > in the human-readable vocabulary documentation, and if commentary is > needed, it should go in the specification and not the JSON-LD Context. > > At present, I believe we just don't have consensus on a SINGLE > approach forward given that there are benefits and drawbacks to each > approach above. No one has been able to convince the community that we > need a single mechanism for commenting in JSON-LD Contexts. > Thanks. We don't have a SINGLE approach, but do we have an approach **at all** ? - @comment does not exist - there is no JSON syntax commenting mechanism (which was a stupid decision, if you ask me), and I will not switch to YAML-LD (or maybe I will in the future, just for this reason) - the use of rdfs:comment (or other annotation) is not possible, as my previous example showed - this does not belong to the vocabulary documentation, since we are here at the syntactic level, not the semantic level (although of course, we are mapping the two) How am I supposed to convey to say, a team of developper, the decisions taken while designing the context ? and a framing spec ? I am not blaming anyone but this is a very frustrating situation. Thomas > -- manu > > -- > Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ > Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. > https://www.digitalbazaar.com/ > -- *Thomas Francart* -* SPARNA* Web de *données* | Architecture de l'*information* | Accès aux *connaissances* blog : blog.sparna.fr, site : sparna.fr, linkedin : fr.linkedin.com/in/thomasfrancart tel : +33 (0)6.71.11.25.97, skype : francartthomas
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2024 13:40:48 UTC