- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 17:27:36 +0100
- To: "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
- Cc: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Despite not sending out a formal agenda we had a brief telecon today. The minutes are now available. http://json-ld.org/minutes/2014-01-07/ A full transcript of the meeting can be found below. The audio will be added soon. ------------------------------------------------------------------- JSON-LD Community Group Telecon Minutes for 2014-01-07 Agenda: n/a (ad-hoc telecon) Topics: 1. Tooling for JSON-LD 2. Context at schema.org 3. Processing of relative IRIs without base 4. Subtree split to create a repository containing just the JSON-LD tests Chair: Markus Lanthaler Scribe: Markus Lanthaler Present: Niklas Lindström, Markus Lanthaler, Paul Kuykendall, Dave Longley Audio: http://json-ld.org/minutes/2014-01-07/audio.ogg Niklas Lindström: .. Is there a telecon today? We planned for the 7th last time, but there's been no mail about it. Markus Lanthaler: I don't know myself.. I just joined but was the only one Paul Kuykendall: I was wondering about that myself Markus Lanthaler: Do we have something to talk about? Paul Kuykendall: We discussed last time the "next steps" with respect to tooling, etc. Paul Kuykendall: Do we have any other items that we should go over? Niklas Lindström: I guess we ended by saying something like "of course, unless we have a bunch of topics/issues, we could wait until we've gathered some and then issue a call".. Markus Lanthaler: There was some discussion regarding the context at schema.org but other than that I don't think anything else happened Markus Lanthaler: I agree, I think that's about it right now. [scribe assist by Niklas Lindström] Markus Lanthaler: So I guess we postpone the telecon!? Paul Kuykendall: Has anyone/group come up with a wish-list of tools, etc. that would be beneficial? Niklas Lindström: I've no problems with taking that on the list and see if we can coalesce the questions around that (publishing contexts, caching and other tooling) Markus Lanthaler: pkuyken.. do you want to briefly discuss this on the call? I'm happy to have a brief call but also fine with moving it to the mailing list Paul Kuykendall: dialing in Markus Lanthaler: niklkasl, will you join us as well for a couple of minutes? Niklas Lindström: sure, dialing in Markus Lanthaler: ping m4nu, taaz, dlongley_ Dave Longley: we are having a brief call if you want to join [scribe assist by Markus Lanthaler] Dave Longley: i can join for a bit Markus Lanthaler is scribing. Topic: Tooling for JSON-LD Paul Kuykendall: 2) Schema.org discussion on list Paul Kuykendall: during the last telecon we discussed what tooling we wanted to have ... I'm wondering where we are at ... do we want to put something up on json-ld.org or on the wiki on GitHub? Niklas Lindström: is having sound issues, so I may miss some speech from time to time Markus Lanthaler: me too Dave Longley: I think it would be good to have a primer ... David Lehn was working on it some time ago but it's not done yet ... people have issues understanding some things (like overloading of @type) ... not sure if a primer would help ... regarding tools: I think creating a wiki page and linking it from json-ld.org would be a good start Niklas Lindström: +1 for a wish list (and list of common questions) ... also updates for the playground would be nice Paul Kuykendall: a simple copy button on the playground would be awesome ... where shall we track these things? Dave Longley: regarding the playground I think you should just file an issue Paul Kuykendall: the only concern I have with the wiki (w3c wiki) is that people have the feeling to have to dig into specs ... instead of just having to use tools etc. Dave Longley: I think we could just use Github issues for this as well Niklas Lindström: one difficult question is always if JSON-LD is usable as just JSON ... schema.org might be an example for that.. can people use different terms (if they are properly mapped in the context)? Dave Longley: I think we should focus on the JSON side of things Niklas Lindström: yeah.. we should mention what kind of constraints that imposes in the primer Dave Longley: do people agree with paul that we should avoid the wiki Niklas Lindström: yeah, wikis are lousy for discussion Markus Lanthaler: I agree. I would prefer to just use Gihub issues with a specific tag so that we can directly link to that list Dave Longley: http://json-ld.org/primer/latest/ (etherpad could be better but issue is good and available) Markus Lanthaler: I think we shouldn't format it using ReSpec but make it look more like a blog post Dave Longley: yeah Topic: Context at schema.org Paul Kuykendall: do we want to discuss the context at schema.org now? Markus Lanthaler: I don't think we can discuss much here because (unfortunately) we are not in control there Niklas Lindström: one of the interesting questions to me is that at this stage the intent of the examples being published is to create data being published by Google ... I think this intended for publishers to publish data for Google and the other schema.org search engines.. not other people ... Google obviously will have their own caches Markus Lanthaler: most problems could be addressed by using @vocab Dave Longley: that wouldn't address the problem that Martin Hepp is throwing in (tools accessing various schema.org URLs for properties etc.) Niklas Lindström: that might be a problem because tools might do optimizations like prefetching etc. ... there are no such tools available for JSON-LD (yet) Markus Lanthaler: that's a general Linked Data "problem" ... tools like Tabulator etc. will have to dereference properties etc. to get their labels Dave Longley: in a lot of cases that's the whole point of all this ... anyway. I think there's progress been made on the mailing list Topic: Processing of relative IRIs without base Dave Longley: markus, I think we never decided what happens when base is set to null Markus Lanthaler: https://github.com/lanthaler/JsonLD/issues/47 Markus Lanthaler: at least my understanding from reading the RFCs is that the algorithms can only be run if there's a base ... if @base is set to null then there's none Dave Longley: is there not even something like path normalization we might could run Markus Lanthaler: I don't think so.. the algorithms are not defined ... http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5 ... The term "relative" implies that a "base URI" exists against which the relative reference is applied. Aside from fragment-only references (Section 4.4), relative references are only usable when a base URI is known. ... A base URI must be established by the parser prior to parsing URI references that might be relative. Dave Longley: I'm fine with not touching relativ IRIs if there's no base Markus Lanthaler: it's a bit weird but should we add a test for this? Dave Longley: hmm.. no I don't think so Markus Lanthaler: it's weird but we don't need to use an empty string Dave Longley: yeah.. maybe that makes sense Markus Lanthaler: that brings me to something else... Topic: Subtree split to create a repository containing just the JSON-LD tests Markus Lanthaler: could we create a subtree split including just the tests? Paul Kuykendall: I think that would be a great idea Markus Lanthaler: do you have access to set up a post-commit webhook on GitHub? I don't Dave Longley: I have access ... I'll try to give you access as well -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2014 16:28:02 UTC