- From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 12:58:56 +0000
- To: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <01020157e752a96e-19f90509-ee11-4326-875e-aa6cd468cf04-000000@eu-west-1.amazonse>
good afternoon; > On 2016-10-21, at 14:33, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>> wrote: >> ... >> >> any effort beyond this scope, for example, to integrate query concerns, will yield architectural errors, consume time and resources, and fail to deliver significant advantage. > > The current proposed update to framing can be found here: https://rawgit.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issue-110-frame-matching/spec/latest/json-ld-framing/index.html <https://rawgit.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issue-110-frame-matching/spec/latest/json-ld-framing/index.html>. This separate out the step of frame matching from the bulk of the framing algorithm which concerns itself with output generation, which is otherwise pretty much the algorithm that has existed for a couple of years. at the moment github does not want to talk to me. i was going to investigate, whether it would permit one to edit-in-place. would you approve of that approach? > > My thought was, given that the framing spec was never really finished that there might be a window for revisiting the syntax, but perhaps not. > > At a minimum, we need to clean up this document and describe what implementations actually do today (such as the playground). Beyond that, there are a number of open issues to consider for framing. Once things become more stable, it needs to be enhanced with a range of examples. Working examples are also in the test-suite: http://json-ld.org/test-suite/ <http://json-ld.org/test-suite/>. yes, i very much appreciate this effort and just expressed the concern, that it not wander off to try to become something else. best regards, from berlin, --- james anderson | james@dydra.com <mailto:james@dydra.com> | http://dydra.com <http://dydra.com/>
Received on Friday, 21 October 2016 12:59:29 UTC